Estátua!
View allAll Photos Tagged Procurement
has been failed, so they started to intake of next 1200 calories.
At Somewhere
Animations: by myself
Coutesy Of
Nelline Morane
Lisapia Resident
Tsubasa Resident
Regio Calatori stellt wohl mittlerweile die zwar langweiligen aber sehr urigen gebraucht aus Frankreich beschafften Caravelle-Triebwagen ab. Im Herbst 2022 war davon noch nichts zu spüren und so konnten wir den 57-0405 als R11186 bei der Ausfahrt aus Lovrin mit dem tollen Signalausleger bei der Fahrt durch die Wiese festhalten.
Regio Calatori is probably now turning off the boring but very quaint used Caravelle railcars procured from France. In autumn 2022 there was still no sign of this and so we were able to capture the 57-0405 as R11186 as it exited Lovrin with the great signal boom driving through the meadow.
I planned a trip to Alaska last year. The borders closed. COVID. Oh well. Maybe next year.
It was now next year. After months and months and probably a few more months of planning; reading maps; calculating kilometres into miles; picking destinations; researching absolutely everything; deciding on rental vehicle versus our new truck; procuring supplies; weighing the cons/pros of total off grid with a tent amongst the bears versus hotel/cabin accommodations amongst tourists; reading reviews; with all the planning behind us, it finally came down to packing the truck. I was like a child at Christmas. I was giddy with excitement!
I know how to pack. When it comes to packing, I am the one!
I am a minimalist so it is easy! However, we were going to Alaska. There was so much that we needed - just in case…
My husband Philip, and I began with great enthusiasm to pack the truck - then we unpacked it. Then we packed it - then we unpacked it. If I was liar I would tell you that we didn’t pack it again only to unpack it for the third time. I am not a liar.
I was ready to pack this holiday in! I broke down and said I wasn’t going. It took me months to get here and now I couldn’t pack the truck?!? After a few minutes we packed the truck
again - only to unpack it one more.
It was midnight. We were leaving at four in the morning. We went to bed. I woke up two hours later and discovered that I did not have a Fairy Godmother that should have, with a twist of her wand, turned the truck into the outfitted carriage that would take us successfully into our journey.
I backed the truck onto the driveway and packed it up again. Philip woke up two hours later and came out to find everything scattered on the driveway. I prayed my neighbours could not hear the choice words that emitted from my mouth. We started from the beginning. We unpacked all the boxes of food, toiletries, dog paraphernalia (Oh yes! We took our German Shepherd, Jager too!), clothing, blankets, pillows and cooking supplies. We got all our suitcases out from storage and packed our clothes into smaller suitcases. Then we unpacked them again and then repacked them for the third time into even smaller carry-on suitcases! We did not need a lot of clothes. We could wear the same jeans till they disintegrated from our bodies.
Who cared - we were going to Alaska.
I don’t know how we did it, but as the sky glowed pink with the promise of a gorgeous sunrise, Philip and I sat in our packed truck. Jager was nestled in the backseat and Philip and I held hands and asked the good Lord to be with us as we set out on another adventure. I felt so fortunate as I backed out of the driveway and pointed the truck North - to Alaska.
I just love holidays!
I read an article today that said that people experience their highest stress levels of the year during the Christmas season.
This starts with the Christmas decorations, goes through the procurement of gifts, various Christmas parties at the company, school or kindergarten through to the planning and organization of the Christmas dinner. Then there are the family obligations during the holidays (who is with whom and when?). Finally, in the post-Christmas period, it culminates in redeeming vouchers, exchanging gifts and clearing up the domestic chaos that the holidays have left behind (both organizationally and emotionally).
When I read this coherently, only one question comes to mind: "Why are we doing this to ourselves?"
Especially in view of the Christian history (very simple circumstances and only three visitors) and what Christmas actually stands for, much of the above is hardly comprehensible to me.
This effort is the complete opposite of what would actually be appropriate at this time of year and takes away so much of the meaning of the Christmas season.
And so I wish you that this week you have the opportunity to clear your head of all these “I have to, because that is what is expected of me” and to replace them with as many “I want to, because that makes me happy” as possible replace.
Ich habe heute einen Artikel gelesen, der besagt, dass die Menschen in der Weihnachtszeit das höchste Stresslevel im Jahr empfinden.
Das beginnt schon bei der Weihnachtsdekoration, geht über die Beschaffung von Geschenken, diverse Weihnachtsfeiern von der Firma, der Schule oder dem Kindergarten bis hin zur Planung und Organisation des Weihnachtsessens. Hinzu kommen dann noch die familiären Verpflichtungen während der Feiertage (wer ist wann bei wem?). Schlußendlich gipfelt es dann in der Nach-Weihnachtszeit in dem Einlösen von Gutscheinen, dem Umtauschen von Geschenken und dem Beseitigen des häuslichen Chaos, welches die Feiertage hinterlassen haben (sowohl organsatorisch als auch emotional).
Wenn ich das so zusammenhängend lese, dann kommt mir nur eine Frage in den Sinn: "Warum tun wir uns das an?"
Vor allem im Hinblick auf die christliche Geschichte (sehr einfache Verhältnisse und nur drei Besucher) und dem, wofür Weihnachten eigentlich steht, ist für mich vieles von dem oben genannten kaum nachvollziehbar.
Dieser Aufwand ist das komplette Gegenteil von dem, was in dieser Zeit des Jashres eigentlich angebracht wäre und nimmt der Weihnachtszeit so viel von Ihrer eigentlichen Bedeutung.
Und so wünsche ich Euch, dass Ihr diese Woche die Gelegenheit habt den Kopf frei zu bekommen von all diesen "Ich muss, denn das wird von mir erwartet" und diese durch so viele "ich möchte, denn das macht mich glücklich" wie möglich zu erstetzen.
more of this on my website at: www.shoot-to-catch.de
En cada onda
un frío intenso
a percorrer os corpos
mortos
os argazos
de carne inerte
e os peixes
nun boliche
ateigado de silencios
Cadaquén procure noutro
as súas sombras
o cheiro a marusía
nestes mares
é unha buguina sorda
que adoito
nos sorprende
impunes
(Modesto Fraga)
THE SIXTH EXTINCTION
Exerpts by Niles Eldredge
There is little doubt left in the minds of professional biologists that Earth is currently faced with a mounting loss of species that threatens to rival the five great mass extinctions of the geological past. As long ago as 1993, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson estimated that Earth is currently losing something on the order of 30,000 species per year — which breaks down to the even more daunting statistic of some three species per hour. Some biologists have begun to feel that this biodiversity crisis — this “Sixth Extinction” — is even more severe, and more imminent, than Wilson had supposed.
Extinction in the past
The major global biotic turnovers were all caused by physical events that lay outside the normal climatic and other physical disturbances which species, and entire ecosystems, experience and survive. What caused them?
The previous mass extinctions were due to natural causes.
First major extinction (c. 440 mya): Climate change (relatively severe and sudden global cooling) seems to have been at work at the first of these-the end-Ordovician mass extinction that caused such pronounced change in marine life (little or no life existed on land at that time). 25% of families lost (a family may consist of a few to thousands of species).
Second major extinction (c. 370 mya): The next such event, near the end of the Devonian Period, may or may not have been the result of global climate change. 19% of families lost.
Third major Extinction (c. 245 mya): Scenarios explaining what happened at the greatest mass extinction event of them all (so far, at least!) at the end of the Permian Period have been complex amalgams of climate change perhaps rooted in plate tectonics movements. Very recently, however, evidence suggests that a bolide impact similar to the end-Cretaceous event may have been the cause. 54% of families lost.
Fourth major extinction (c. 210 mya): The event at the end of the Triassic Period, shortly after dinosaurs and mammals had first evolved, also remains difficult to pin down in terms of precise causes. 23% of families lost.
Fifth major extinction (c. 65 mya): Most famous, perhaps, was the most recent of these events at the end-Cretaceous. It wiped out the remaining terrestrial dinosaurs and marine ammonites, as well as many other species across the phylogenetic spectrum, in all habitats sampled from the fossil record. Consensus has emerged in the past decade that this event was caused by one (possibly multiple) collisions between Earth and an extraterrestrial bolide (probably cometary). Some geologists, however, point to the great volcanic event that produced the Deccan traps of India as part of the chain of physical events that disrupted ecosystems so severely that many species on land and sea rapidly succumbed to extinction. 17% of families lost.
How is The Sixth Extinction different from previous events?
The current mass extinction is caused by humans.
At first glance, the physically caused extinction events of the past might seem to have little or nothing to tell us about the current Sixth Extinction, which is a patently human-caused event. For there is little doubt that humans are the direct cause of ecosystem stress and species destruction in the modern world through such activities as:
-transformation of the landscape
-overexploitation of species
-pollution
-the introduction of alien species
And, because Homo sapiens is clearly a species of animal (however behaviorally and ecologically peculiar an animal), the Sixth Extinction would seem to be the first recorded global extinction event that has a biotic, rather than a physical, cause.
We are bringing about massive changes in the environment.
Yet, upon further reflection, human impact on the planet is a direct analogue of the Cretaceous cometary collision. Sixty-five million years ago that extraterrestrial impact — through its sheer explosive power, followed immediately by its injections of so much debris into the upper reaches of the atmosphere that global temperatures plummeted and, most critically, photosynthesis was severely inhibited — wreaked havoc on the living systems of Earth. That is precisely what human beings are doing to the planet right now: humans are causing vast physical changes on the planet.
What is the Sixth Extinction?
We can divide the Sixth Extinction into two discrete phases:
-Phase One began when the first modern humans began to disperse to different parts of the world about 100,000 years ago.
-Phase Two began about 10,000 years ago when humans turned to agriculture.
Humans began disrupting the environment as soon as they appeared on Earth.
The first phase began shortly after Homo sapiens evolved in Africa and the anatomically modern humans began migrating out of Africa and spreading throughout the world. Humans reached the middle east 90,000 years ago. They were in Europe starting around 40,000 years ago. Neanderthals, who had long lived in Europe, survived our arrival for less than 10,000 years, but then abruptly disappeared — victims, according to many paleoanthropologists, of our arrival through outright warfare or the more subtle, though potentially no less devastating effects, of being on the losing side of ecological competition.
Everywhere, shortly after modern humans arrived, many (especially, though by no means exclusively, the larger) native species typically became extinct. Humans were like bulls in a China shop:
-They disrupted ecosystems by overhunting game species, which never experienced contact with humans before.
-And perhaps they spread microbial disease-causing organisms as well.
The fossil record attests to human destruction of ecosystems:
-Wherever early humans migrated, other species became extinct.
-Humans arrived in large numbers in North America roughly 12,500 years ago-and sites revealing the butchering of mammoths, mastodons and extinct buffalo are well documented throughout the continent. The demise of the bulk of the La Brea tar pit Pleistocene fauna coincided with our arrival.
-The Caribbean lost several of its larger species when humans arrived some 8000 years ago.
-Extinction struck elements of the Australian megafauna much earlier-when humans arrived some 40,000 years ago. Madagascar-something of an anomaly, as humans only arrived there two thousand years ago-also fits the pattern well: the larger species (elephant birds, a species of hippo, plus larger lemurs) rapidly disappeared soon after humans arrived.
Indeed, only in places where earlier hominid species had lived (Africa, of course, but also most of Europe and Asia) did the fauna, already adapted to hominid presence, survive the first wave of the Sixth Extinction pretty much intact. The rest of the world’s species, which had never before encountered hominids in their local ecosystems, were as naively unwary as all but the most recently arrived species (such as Vermilion Flycatchers) of the Galapagos Islands remain to this day.
Why does the Sixth Extinction continue?
The invention of agriculture accelerated the pace of the Sixth Extinction.
Phase two of the Sixth Extinction began around 10,000 years ago with the invention of agriculture-perhaps first in the Natufian culture of the Middle East. Agriculture appears to have been invented several different times in various different places, and has, in the intervening years, spread around the entire globe.
Agriculture represents the single most profound ecological change in the entire 3.5 billion-year history of life. With its invention:
-Humans did not have to interact with other species for survival, and so could manipulate other species for their own use
-Humans did not have to adhere to the ecosystem’s carrying capacity, and so could overpopulate
-Humans do not live with nature but outside it.
Homo sapiens became the first species to stop living inside local ecosystems. All other species, including our ancestral hominid ancestors, all pre-agricultural humans, and remnant hunter-gatherer societies still extant exist as semi-isolated populations playing specific roles (i.e., have “niches”) in local ecosystems. This is not so with post-agricultural revolution humans, who in effect have stepped outside local ecosystems. Indeed, to develop agriculture is essentially to declare war on ecosystems - converting land to produce one or two food crops, with all other native plant species all now classified as unwanted “weeds” — and all but a few domesticated species of animals now considered as pests.
The total number of organisms within a species is limited by many factors-most crucial of which is the “carrying capacity” of the local ecosystem: given the energetic needs and energy-procuring adaptations of a given species, there are only so many squirrels, oak trees and hawks that can inhabit a given stretch of habitat. Agriculture had the effect of removing the natural local-ecosystem upper limit of the size of human populations. Though crops still fail regularly, and famine and disease still stalk the land, there is no doubt that agriculture in the main has had an enormous impact on human population size:
-Earth can’t sustain the trend in human population growth. It is reaching its limit in carrying capacity.
-Estimates vary, but range between 1 and 10 million people on earth 10,000 years ago.
-There are now over 6 billion people.
-The numbers continue to increase logarithmically — so that there will be 8 billion by 2020.
-There is presumably an upper limit to the carrying capacity of humans on earth — of the numbers that agriculture can support — and that number is usually estimated at between 13-15 billion, though some people think the ultimate numbers might be much higher.
This explosion of human population, especially in the post-Industrial Revolution years of the past two centuries, coupled with the unequal distribution and consumption of wealth on the planet, is the underlying cause of the Sixth Extinction. There is a vicious cycle:
-Overpopulation, invasive species, and overexploitation are fueling the extinction.
-More lands are cleared and more efficient production techniques (most recently engendered largely through genetic engineering) to feed the growing number of humans — and in response, the human population continues to expand.
-Higher fossil energy use is helping agriculture spread, further modifying the environment.
-Humans continue to fish (12 of the 13 major fisheries on the planet are now considered severely depleted) and harvest timber for building materials and just plain fuel, pollution, and soil erosion from agriculture creates dead zones in fisheries (as in the Gulf of Mexico)
-While the human Diaspora has meant the spread, as well, of alien species that more often than not thrive at the detriment of native species. For example, invasive species have contributed to 42% of all threatened and endangered species in the U.S.
Can conservation measures stop the Sixth Extinction?
Only 10% of the world’s species survived the third mass extinction. Will any survive this one?
The world’s ecosystems have been plunged into chaos, with some conservation biologists thinking that no system, not even the vast oceans, remains untouched by human presence. Conservation measures, sustainable development, and, ultimately, stabilization of human population numbers and consumption patterns seem to offer some hope that the Sixth Extinction will not develop to the extent of the third global extinction, some 245 mya, when 90% of the world’s species were lost.
Though it is true that life, so incredibly resilient, has always recovered (though after long lags) after major extinction spasms, it is only after whatever has caused the extinction event has dissipated. That cause, in the case of the Sixth Extinction, is ourselves — Homo sapiens. This means we can continue on the path to our own extinction, or, preferably, we modify our behavior toward the global ecosystem of which we are still very much a part. The latter must happen before the Sixth Extinction can be declared over, and life can once again rebound.
© 2005, American Institute of Biological Sciences. Educators have permission to reprint articles for classroom use; other users, please contact editor@actionbioscience.org for reprint permission. See reprint policy.
Paleontologist Dr. Niles Eldredge is the Curator-in-Chief of the permanent exhibition “Hall of Biodiversity” at the American Museum of Natural History and adjunct professor at the City University of New York. He has devoted his career to examining evolutionary theory through the fossil record, publishing his views in more than 160 scientific articles, reviews, and books. Life in the Balance: Humanity and the Biodiversity Crisisis his most recent book.
www.gc.cuny.edu/directories/faculty/E.htm
Articles and Resources on The Sixth Extinction
Consequences of the Sixth Extinction
The article “How Will Sixth Extinction Affect Evolution of Species?,” on our site, describes how the current loss of biodiversity will affect evolution in the long run.
www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/myers_knoll.html
BioScience Article
“Global Conservation of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.”
Habitat destruction has driven much of the current biodiversity extinction crisis, and it compromises the essential benefits, or ecosystem services that humans derive from functioning ecosystems. Securing both species and ecosystem services might be accomplished with common solutions. Yet it is unknown whether these two major conservation objectives coincide broadly enough worldwide to enable global strategies for both goals to gain synergy. In this November 2007, BioScience article, Will Turner and his colleagues assess the concordance between these two objectives, explore how the concordance varies across different regions, and examine the global potential for safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem services simultaneously. Read the abstract, or log in to purchase the full article.
caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1641/B571009
Biodiversity in the next millennium
American Museum of Natural History’s nationwide survey (undated) “reveals biodiversity crisis — the fastest mass extinction in Earth’s history.”
cbc.amnh.org/crisis/mncntnt.html
National Geographic
A 2/99 article about the Sixth Extinction, with views from several leading scientists.
www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/9902/fngm/index.html
Extinction through time
Find out about cycles of life and death and extinction patterns through time.
www.carleton.ca/Museum/extinction/tablecont.html
Is Humanity Suicidal?
Edward O. Wilson asks us why we stay on the course to our own self-destruction.
www.well.com/user/davidu/suicidal.html
A Field Guide to the Sixth Extinction
Niles Eldredge writes in 1999 about a few of the millions of plants and animals that won’t make it to the next millennium. The second link takes you to the site’s main page, entitled “Mass Extinction Underway — The World Wide Web’s most comprehensive source of information on the current mass extinction,” which provides links to numerous other resources.
www.well.com/user/davidu/fieldguide.html
www.well.com/user/davidu/extinction.html
Global Environment Outlook 3
The United Nations Environment Programme released this major report in May 2002. The report collated the thoughts of more than 1,000 contributors to assess the environmental impact of the last 30 years and outline policy ideas for the next three decades. It concluded that without action, the world may experience severe environmental problems within 30 years. The entire report can be read online or purchased online.
www.unep.org/geo/geo3/index.htm
Test your environmental knowledge
A 1999 survey showed that only one in three adult Americans had a passing understanding of the most pressing environmental issues. How do you measure up? Explanatory answers provided.
www.youthactionnet.org/quizzes/global_environment.cfm
World Atlas of Biodiversity — interactive map
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) released the firstWorld Atlas of Biodiversityin August 2002. This link takes you to their online interactive map that helps you search for data about species/land/water loss, extinction over time, and human global development. Click on the “?” for a help page that explains how to interact with this map.
stort.unep-wcmc.org/imaps/gb2002/book/viewer.htm
The Sixth Great Extinction: A Status Report
Earth Policy Institute’s 2004 update on the status of loss of biodiversity.
www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update35.htm
Books
» The Biodiversity Crisis: Losing What Countsby The American Museum of Natural History (New Press, 2001).
» The Sixth Extinction: Patterns of of Life and the Future of Humankindby Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin (Doubleday and Company, 1996).
Get Involved
The Biodiversity Project
You can choose a way to get involved in protecting biodiversity — from educational resources to community outreach.
www.biodiversityproject.org/html/resources/introduction.htm
The Nature Conservancy
Select a state from the menu and find out how you can become an environmental volunteer in that state.
Information for Action
“This website explains the environmental problems & offers solutions to fix them. There are many valuable resources available” including lobbying info, contacts database, & news updates.
Harmony
“Harmony Foundation is all about education for the environment. We offer publications and programs… ‘Building Sustainable Societies’ offers innovative training for educators and community group leaders to support local action on important environmental issues.”
Earth Talk: Environmental advocacy for professionals
This discussion community and learning network seeks to contribute to global ecological sustainability by enabling communication connections between those working on behalf of forests, water, and climate.
* * *
Tiger Illustration by Dorothy Lathrop from
"Fierce-Face: The story of a tiger" by Dhan Gopal Mukerji (1936)
The Eurofighter Typhoon is a European multinational twin-engine, canard delta wing, multirole fighter. The Typhoon was designed originally as an air superiority fighter[5] and is manufactured by a consortium of Airbus, BAE Systems and Leonardo that conducts the majority of the project through a joint holding company, Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH. The NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency, representing the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain, manages the project and is the prime customer.
The aircraft's development effectively began in 1983 with the Future European Fighter Aircraft programme, a multinational collaboration among the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain. Previously, Germany, Italy and the UK had jointly developed and deployed the Panavia Tornado combat aircraft and desired to collaborate on a new project, with additional participating EU nations. However disagreements over design authority and operational requirements led France to leave the consortium to develop the Dassault Rafale independently. A technology demonstration aircraft, the British Aerospace EAP, first flew on 6 August 1986; a Eurofighter prototype made its maiden flight on 27 March 1994. The aircraft's name, Typhoon, was adopted in September 1998 and the first production contracts were also signed that year.
The sudden end of the Cold War reduced European demand for fighter aircraft and led to debate over the aircraft's cost and work share and protracted the Typhoon's development: the Typhoon entered operational service in 2003 and is now in service with the air forces of Austria, Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, Saudi Arabia and Oman. Kuwait and Qatar have also ordered the aircraft, bringing the procurement total to 623 aircraft as of 2019.
The Eurofighter Typhoon is a highly agile aircraft, designed to be an effective dogfighter in combat. Later production aircraft have been increasingly better equipped to undertake air-to-surface strike missions and to be compatible with an increasing number of different armaments and equipment, including Storm Shadow, Brimstone and Marte ER missiles. The Typhoon had its combat debut during the 2011 military intervention in Libya with the UK's Royal Air Force (RAF) and the Italian Air Force, performing aerial reconnaissance and ground-strike missions. The type has also taken primary responsibility for air-defence duties for the majority of customer nations.
Procuré mantener las distancias, era una lacra, todo lo que rodeaba el incidente de aquella noche se tornaba tóxico. Estábamos contaminados, cada poro, cada idea, ya no quedaba nada limpio en nosotros.
How do you tell the sex of a Great Horned Owl? Well, I don't have the absolutely positive answer, but from what I've read, once nesting begins, the female is the only member of the mated pair that actually sits on the nest, while the male procures food for the female and the chicks (once hatched).
We watched a bare deciduous tree, which hosted this female tending her nest and a male, which was present on multiple occasions early in the mornings.
The male provided food for the female, while she sat on her nest, which blended into the tree branches pretty darned well.
And...in a couple of weeks, this tree will leaf-out, at which time these owls will be virtually invisible to passing motorists.
Fun times indeed!!!
My Website : Twitter : Facebook : Instagram : Photocrowd
This looks like it might be a highrise office block in the heart of the City but actually it's the Royal London Hospital in the East End.
I liked the optical illusion this shot creates as it's not clear whether this is an internal or external corner.....
This was taken during last Octobers London Flickr Group Photowalk around Whitechapel and Aldgate. Our next photowalk is planned for Saturday 15th March, more info here if you're interested in coming along : www.flickr.com/groups/londonflickrgroup/discuss/721577219...
Click here to see more of London architecture : www.flickr.com/photos/darrellg/albums/72157635041185106
From Wikipedia, "In March 2005 planning permission was granted for the redevelopment and expansion of The Royal London Hospital. The scheme was procured under a Private Finance Initiative contract in 2006. Sited on the grounds of the existing hospital, the works involved the replacement of certain of the hospital's old facilities, some of which dated back to when the hospital moved to its existing site in 1757. The works also involved the creation of a new trauma and emergency care centre and substantial new renal and paediatric facilities. These works, which were designed by HOK and undertaken by Skanska at a cost of £650 million, opened in part in 2012 and were completed in 2016. The old hospital buildings were converted into the new Tower Hamlets Town Hall for Tower Hamlets Council between 2019 and 2023."
© D.Godliman
The old Quebec seminary - the Procure wing
In the heart of the historic quarter of Quebec’s capital city, the buildings of the Old Québec Seminary were built between 1675 and 1868.
“Today this complex is called the Vieux Séminaire de Québec. It is modeled on French 17th-century convents and colleges. Its three buildings have features specific to French Regime construction: white plaster walls with S-shaped wall anchors, higher in certain spots to serve as a fire stop, and tin roofs with dormer windows. The buildings are arranged to form a typical inner court.
The Procure wing, shown here, with its signature sundial dating from 1773 is the oldest building. It was constructed sometime around 1680, then rebuilt three times due to fire. The only parts that remain from the original building are the vaulted cellars where Monseigneur Laval’s kitchen was located.
A LEADING INSTITUTION OF NEW FRANCE
The Séminaire de Québec was a society of Catholic priests founded in 1663 by François de Laval, who would become the first bishop of Québec. He established this society to train priests, evangelize the Aboriginals, and administer the parishes of the colony as a whole. Two years later he opened the Petit Séminaire, a boys’ school. The site of the first building is indicated by the rectangular marking on the pavement of the inner court.
A CLASSICAL EDUCATION
It was Louis XIV’s wish that the Petit Séminaire educate young boys and convert the Aboriginals. But for the first 100 years, it was a boarding school for future priests who studied at the Jesuit College—very close by, where City Hall is located today—before entering the Grand Séminaire.
After the conquest of New France was formalized in 1760, the British army requisitioned the Jesuit College for use as barracks. From that point on, the Séminaire had to expand its role and become an educational institution providing a classical curriculum, as the Jesuits were expelled from the colony. The students at the Petit Séminaire received an education based on the great European philosophers and writers, as well as French, Greek, and Latin. The purpose of this training in the classics was to mold them into full-fledged citizens, hale in mind and body, to make up the elite of Québec society.
THE TRADITION LIVES ON
The three wings of the Vieux Séminaire housed the Petit Séminaire de Québec until 1987. Its educational role lives on because Université Laval’s school of architecture is now occupied these heritage buildings.”
Source: www.ville.quebec.qc.ca/en/citoyens/patrimoine/quartiers/v...
Mercedes-Benz L 1113 B (1986) in Bonn, Germany
Large numbers of the standardised LF 16 TS fire engine were procured by the federal government for civil defence/desaster relief organisations from 1984 until the early 1990s. After 30 years in service, many of the "Rundhauber" are only now being replaced. This LF 16 TS fitted by Lentner was used Velen volunteer fire service.
North American Aviation SNJ-5 N3680F, c/n 88-16574, competing in Heat 2C of the T-6 class at the 2021 Reno Air Races.
This aircraft was originally procured around 1942 by the USAAF as AT-6D 42-84793. It was then transferred to the U.S. Navy, where it was designated SNJ-5, 84843.
For more about this aircraft, see:
www.aerialvisuals.ca/AirframeDossier.php?Serial=24107
2021 Reno Air Races
Reno Stead AIrport (RTS / KRTS)
For 2021 Reno Air Race Results, see:
reports.airrace.org/2021/index.html
North American T-6 Texan (Wikipedia):
The tower known as La Specola rises on the spot where Ezzelino III da Romano, the 13th-century tyrant of Padova, had built his fortified castle.
The present-day tower was erected in the 14th century, after the fort was rebuilt by Francesco I da Carrara. In 1767 the building was converted into an astronomical observatory (specula). In 1777 the tower housed a lower observatory, 16 metres above ground level, and an upper observatory at a height of 35 metres. The lower observatory was named the Sala Meridiana; noon was measured on the meridian line sunk in the floor. The upper observatory has walls of eight metres, and its large windows are almost six metres high.
The observatory remained in use until the 1930s, when the University decided to procure a large modern telescope; the site selected for the instrument was Asiago, on a plateau north of Padova, where the new structure was commissioned in 1942.
Three former Aero Union Lockheed P-3A Orion fire-fighting aircraft at Chico Regional Airport (CIC / KCIC).
The three aircraft carry markings for MAFFS, current manufacturer of the Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System. See:
US FAA registration records indicate that they are registered to United Aeronautical Corp.
These three aircraft were originally converted for fire fighting and operated by now-defunct Aero Union.
Aero Union (Wikipedia):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_Union
The aircraft are, in order:
Lockheed P-3A N925AU
Originally procured as U.S. Navy 151361, MSN 185-5074
Withdrawn from Navy service 1984
Lockheed P-3A N927AU
Originally procured as U.S. Navy 151369, MSN 185-5082
Withdrawn from Navy service 1984
Lockheed P-3A N900AU
Originally procured as U.S. Navy 151391, MSN 185-5104
Lockheed P-3 Orion (Wikipedia):
Venha, procure, porque a busca é o alicerce da sorte: todo sucesso depende de colocar o coração naquilo que você quer.
T-056 Airbus A330-243 MRTT A332 c/n1919 AJBQ 480C42
MMF NATO Support and Procurement
EYSA 131320Z 30013KT 280V340 CAVOK 26/11 Q1011 NOSIG
Cockpit of Lockheed Model 18-56 Lodestar N631LS,
c/n 18-2404
This aircraft was originally procured / impressed into military service by the U.S. Navy as an R5O-5, 12474.
Eloy Municipal AIrport (E60)
Eloy, Arizona
For more information about this aircraft, see:
www.aerialvisuals.ca/AirframeDossier.php?Serial=9747
Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar (Wikipedia):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Model_18_Lodestar
Eloy Municipal Airport (airport web site):
Eloy Municipal Airport (Wikipedia):
Douglas DC-3 N57123 (c/n 33170) may have originally been procured as TC-47B 44-76837, before being transferred to the US Navy as R4D-7 99831.*
As of March 2016, the US registration N57123 was still assigned to this aircraft, but its status was "Expired" as of 12/31/2012.*
Photographed at Falcon Field, Mesa, Arizona (KMSC)
July 2000
(Scanned 35mm color negative)
*References:
www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries10.html
registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbe...
Lockheed-built TF-104G c/n 583F-5939, originally procured under USAF s/n 66-13628, delivered to the Luftwaffe and eventually operated by NASA as N825NA.
There are minor differences in constructor's numbers attributed to this aircraft. Some sources - including the US FAA (!) - cite the c/n as 583D-5939.
Other sources, including Joe Baugher's Serial Number Database and "Lockheed Aircraft Since 1913" by Rene J. Francillon cite the c/n as 583F-5939.*
In any case, a variety of sources agree that the aircraft was withdrawn from service with NASA in 1994.
Moffett Field Historical Society Museum:
*References:
www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1966.html
Lockheed Aircraft Since 1913. Francillon, Rene J. (1987). US Naval Institute Press, Annapolis.
This C-119B, procured as USAF s/n 48-0322, c/n 10304, was operated as a fire-fighting air tanker by Hemet Valley Flying Service under US civil registration N13745.
According to Joe Baugher's serial number database, the US General Services Administration planned to sell it at auction in 2016.*
General William J. Fox Airfield (WJF)
Lancaster, California
November 1998
*Reference:
On January 23, 1941, a brief groundbreaking ceremony at the site marked the start of construction of the Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory (AERL), now the Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field. Dr. George W. Lewis, director of research for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), loosened the soil with a chromium-plated pick for Major General George H. Brett, acting chief of the Army Air Corps, who turned the first shovelful of earth.
Participating in the groundbreaking ceremony left to right (does not include two individuals obscured from view behind Maj. Brett and Dr. Lewis):
•William R. Hopkins – Cleveland City Manager from 1924-1930, was personally responsible for planning and acquiring the land for the Cleveland Airport. The airport’s huge capacity for handling aircraft was one factor in selecting Cleveland for the site of the research center. The Cleveland Airport was renamed Cleveland Hopkins airport in his honor in 1951.
•Major John Berry – Cleveland Airport Manager
•Edward R. Sharp – GRC’s first director, serving from 1942 to his retirement in 1961. He came to Cleveland in 1941 as the construction manager for the new facility.
•Frederick C. Crawford – President of Thompson Products, which became the Thompson-Ramo-Woolridge Corporation (TRW) in 1958. Crawford was, at the time, also president of the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce. He began in 1939 to campaign for Cleveland as the location for the new NACA facility.
•Major George H. Brett – A Cleveland native, Brett served in WWI and was commanding officer at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio before becoming chief of the Army Air Corps.
•Dr. Edward P. Warner – Acting chairman of the NACA.
•Captain Sydney M. Kraus – Officer in charge of Navy procurement
•Edward Blythin – Mayor of Cleveland
•Dr. George Lewis – Director of Aeronautical Research for the NACA from 1924-1947, Lewis devoted his life to building a scientific basis for aeronautical engineering. The Cleveland laboratory was renamed the Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory in his honor in 1948.
Credit: NASA
Image Number: C-1982-6410
Date: January 23, 1941
+++ 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 Hawker Hunter was a transonic British jet-powered fighter aircraft that was developed by Hawker Aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF) during the late 1940s and early 1950s. It was designed to take advantage of the newly developed Rolls-Royce Avon turbojet engine and the swept wing and was the first jet-powered aircraft produced by Hawker to be procured by the RAF. On 7 September 1953, the modified first prototype broke the world air speed record for aircraft, achieving a speed of 727.63 mph (1,171.01 km/h; 632.29 kn).
The single-seat Hunter was introduced to service in 1954 as a maneuverable day interceptor aircraft, quickly succeeding first-generation jet fighters in RAF service such as the Gloster Meteor and the de Havilland Venom. The all-weather/night fighter role was filled by the Gloster Javelin. Successively improved variants of the type were produced, adopting increasingly more capable engine models, and expanding its fuel capacity amongst other modifications being implemented.
The Hunter was exported to many countries all over the world, and one of the first foreign customers was Sweden. In the early 1950s, the Swedish Air Force saw the need for an interceptor that could reach enemy bombers at a higher altitude than the J 29 Tunnan that formed the backbone of the fighter force. A contract for 120 Hawker Hunter Mk 50s (an export version, equivalent to the RAF’s contemporary Mk. 4) was therefore signed on 29 June 1954 and the first aircraft was delivered on 26 August 1955. The model was locally designated J 34 and was assigned to two fighter wings F 8 (Barkaby) and F 18 (Tullinge) near Stockholm to defend the country’s capital as an interim solution before a more modern interceptor in the form of the indigenous Saab J 35 Draken was ready for service.
The J 34 was not fitted with a search radar, it only had a simple ranging radar for the guns and was consequently a pure day fighter aircraft. Its flying characteristics were excellent, though. It was a fast aircraft, with a maximum speed of 1.150 km/h, in spite of the fact that the Rolls-Royce Avon 23 (locally designated RM 5B) engine with a thrust of 4.080 kp lacked an afterburner. The Swedish Hunters’ mission was primarily to intercept enemy bombers, which were expected to attack from high altitudes, and they complemented the Swedish Air Force’s fleet of Saab J 32B, a radar-equipped all-weather/night fighter version of the Saab 32 Lansen fighter-bomber..
The J 34 was initially only armed with four 30 mm (1.18 in) cannon but soon retrofitted with launch rails for two AIM-9 Sidewinders (Swedish designation Rb 24) under the outer wings that markedly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. A project to improve the performance of the J 34 further resulted in one Hunter being fitted with a Swedish-designed afterburner in 1958. While this significantly increased the engine's thrust, there was little improvement in overall performance, so that the project was shelved.
The Hunters’ career as an interceptor in Swedish service did not last long, though: During the 1960s, the J 34s were gradually replaced by supersonic J 35 Draken and reassigned to less prominent air wings, F 9 in Gothenburg and F 10 in Ängelholm.
At that time the Swedish Air Force was in a critical transitory phase concerning tactical photo reconnaissance. The current standard type for this mission was the Saab S 29C from the late Forties, complemented by the bigger Saab S 32C, which was a photo reconnaissance version developed from the A 32A attack aircraft. 45 of the latter aircraft had been built between 1958 and 1959 and the machines were equipped with a PS-432/A radar with extended range and with six cameras. Additionally, a photo reconnaissance version of the state-of-the-art supersonic Saab 35 Draken was under development, but when its first prototype flew in 1963, it was uncertain when it would become fully operational - the Draken’s interceptor variants had priority, and technology was advancing so fast at that time that upgrades were already in the making while the first production J 35s were delivered. In the meantime, the S 29C had become outdated and the more modern S 32C was rather optimized for maritime patrol. The relatively young surplus of J 34s fighters offered the opportunity to convert several airframes into tactical photo reconnaissance aircraft for low-level use over land, primarily as a replacement for the S 29Cs and as a stopgap until the S 35E would arrive at frontline reconnaissance units.
This led to the S 34B (the J 34s were consequently re-designated J 34A for better differentiation) conversion program. Sixteen airframes with relatively few flying hours were set aside and modified by Saab at Linköping in 1963. The airframe remained at the Hunter Mk. 50/Mk.4s’ standard and retained the type’s original non-afterburner engine and unmodified wings (in the meantime, a dog-toothed wing had been introduced with the Mk.6 that improved handling). The nose section was thoroughly modified to carry a broad array of cameras, and lengthened by about 4'. To compensate for the center of gravity shift through the extra equipment in the nose and create enough space for it, the Hunter’s fuselage-mounted 30 mm guns were completely deleted. The area under the cockpit was widened into a shallow tub with a flat floor, together with an extended, pointed tip which improved low-level flight stability with the now nose but still lacked any radar.
The re-contoured nose/cockpit section contained climatized compartments and windows for a total of six cameras, optimized for low-level reconnaissance and mountable in different angles:
- a long focal-length forward-looking SKA 16b (Vinten F.95) camera in the nose tip
- a sideways-looking wide angle SKA 42-44 camera (facing either to portside or starboard)
- a left oblique/forward infrared camera (various types were used, e.g. an SKA 16a/150 or an SKA 10/92
- a right oblique/forward SKA 16/10
- a vertical SKA 15/15 (F.49 Eagle IX Mk. 2)
- a vertical SKA 16a/150 infrared camera
The Hunter’s four underwing hardpoints were retained, though. All were plumbed to accept drop tanks for long-range missions and the capability to carry a pair of Sidewinders on the outer stations for self-defense was retained, too – even though this option was later in service almost never used. Later during their career, the S 34Bs could alternatively carry defensive equipment like chaff dispensers (e.g. the Motmedelskapsel KB a.k.a. BOZ-100) and early ECM devices like the Petrus/Adrian jamming pods from the Saab 32. However, most of the time the S 34Bs were operated in clean configuration to maximize low-level speed and handling, or just with a pair of drop tanks for long-range patrols along the Swedish borders.
An initial S 34B prototype was built in 1964 and flown late during the same year. Thorough operational tests with the camera installations lasted until mid-1965 at the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen in Linköping. The full conversion program started in June 1964 and the first S 34B conversions were delivered to the Södermanland Wing (F11) in August 1965, where they were exclusively operated and replaced all S 29Cs of the unit’s first squadron, while the second squadron stuck to the S 29C but received four Sk 35C Draken trainers, a measure to prepare the unit for the eventual complete conversion to the S 35D. A total of seventeen Hawker Hunter Mk.50s were modified until 1966, including the prototype, which was brought to the operational S 34B status, too, and integrated into the active fleet. Unlike the J 34A fighters, the recce Hunters received a disruptive and unique three-tone camouflage in dark blue and two shades of dark green on the upper surfaces, reflecting their low-altitude mission profile. Another odd feature of F11’s J 34Bs were their individual tactical codes in the form of colored (red) numeric characters instead of letters, sharing this practice with F11’s contemporary S 32C Lansens.
Overall, the Hunter’s service with the Swedish Air Force was not long, though. The J 34A day fighters were already retired from service in 1969 and partly sold, while the S 34Bs were kept active until 1974, when operations at F11’s home base were expanded: the Swedish Air Force Intelligence School (FV UndS) was relocated to Nyköping and Saab 35 Draken fully replaced the last S 29Cs and the recce Hunters (which both lacked trainer versions). But already a year later, when the Palme government presented its bill 1975:75, a dismantling of two flotilla administrations, Södermanland's air fleet (F 11) and Kalmar air fleet (F 12), was proposed. The background was that the Swedish Defense Forces' peace organization investigation (FFU) in January 1971, tasked with investigating how the air force's peace organization from the mid-1980s could be adapted to the development of the war organization. That the flotilla would be dismantled was a matter of course, as the FFU considered that the reconnaissance divisions should be redistributed to other flotillas, primarily for operational and readiness reasons. Furthermore, the aircraft that the flotilla was armed with, the S 32C Lansen and the S 35D Draken, were to be replaced in the 1980s with the new SH/SF 37 Viggen. This also meant that aerial reconnaissance could then be solved in three aviation divisions, instead of the five reconnaissance aviation divisions that then existed within the Air Force.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 49 ft 0.5 in (14.98 m)
Wingspan: 33 ft 8 in (10.26 m)
Height: 13 ft 2 in (4.01 m)
Wing area: 349 sq ft (32.4 m²)
Airfoil: Hawker 8.5% symmetrical
Empty weight: 14,122 lb (6,406 kg)
Gross weight: 17,750 lb (8,051 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 24,600 lb (11,158 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Rolls-Royce RM5B1 (Avon 23) turbojet engine, 9,000 lbf (40.8 kN) thrust
Performance:
Maximum speed: 623 mph (1,003 km/h, 541 kn, Mach 0.94) at 36,000 ft (11,000 m)
715 mph (621 kn; 1,151 km/h) at sea level
Range: 385 mi (620 km, 335 nmi) with internal fuel only,
1,900 mi (3,100 km, 1,700 nmi) ferry range with maximum external fuel
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,000 m)
Rate of climb: 17,200 ft/min (87 m/s)
Wing loading: 51.6 lb/sq ft (252 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.56
Armament:
No internal guns;
4× underwing hardpoints with a total capacity of 7,400 lb (3,400 kg)
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional converted Hawker Hunter is a submission to the 2022 “Lightning, Canberra & Hunter” group build at whatifmodellers.com. The idea for a recce Hunter came when I wondered why there had not been a more dedicated variant than the FR.10, and when the GB came up I decided to build one from a Revell 1:72 kit. Sweden appeared as a good potential and attractive operator, as the Hunter would fit well between the Tunnan and Draken era – and I also had some donor parts from Swedish aircraft that would find their way into the rhinoplasty.
The kit is Revell’s 1:72 Hawker Hunter F.6 – initially I wanted to use an FGA.9 variant of this kit, but upon close inspection I found out that the Swedish Hunters were of a much earlier standard that made the FGA.9 an unsuitable starting point. While the Mk.4/50’s dog-teeth-less wings would be realized with a conversion set from Wolfpack, the early variants’ non-afterburner jet exhaust would have had to be scratched. It was eventually easier to procure a suitable variant of the Revell kit that offered this nozzle OOB, #04350, the first boxing from 2007 which was subsequently re-issued several times with slightly modified parts/sprues that depict later Hunter variants.
When I started building the kit, however, I found out that the kit was missing two parts – very untypical for Revell?! Apparently, the missing parts had broken off of the sprues during the packaging process, since both box and bag inside were still sealed when I received the kit. One missing piece was one of the separate dog-tooth slat sections for the wings, which could be easily replaced with the parts from the very crisp Wolfpack Hunter F.1/2/4/5 resin conversion set (which also includes a longer metal pitot) that was actually designed for the Revell kit, the other was a main landing gear cover. The latter was replaced by Revell of Germany for free within a couple of days after I had placed a request for a spare part at their service touchpoint. Great service!
The Revell Hunter is nice and probably the best contemporary kit of this aircraft in 1:72, even though it needs some PSR, esp. around the wing attachment seams on the fuselage. Beyond the wing modifications to create a Swedish F.4/Mk. 50 export variant I decided to thoroughly change the nose section, more than the FR.10’s small camera nose tip (which is available as a clear resin piece from Quickboost). I used the Saab 29 as a design benchmark and decided to replace the Hunter’s gun bays with camera compartments, using a leftover optional tray from a Heller S 29C to re-shape the area under the cockpit sides. I wanted to retain the original front landing gear well, though, so that only the “edges” from the Tunnan’s camera ports were transplanted under the Hunter’s front fuselage, creating pronounced “cheeks” and a more or less flat bottom.
To take the photo recce conversion even further I replaced the Hunter’s stub nose with a pointed alternative, a spare SF 37 nose with a forward-facing camera window from a Heller kit that I had received from a good friend a while ago. The Viggen nose was trimmed down to the same diameter as the Hunter’s, and its pitot was removed since the Hunter would retain the original wing-mounted sensor.
This recontoured nose section was blended into the Hunter’s fuselage with several layers/turns of PSR. My initial hope to retain the clear parts’ transparency for the finished S 34B soon evaporated, though, because the body work became so thorough that everything disappeared under layers of putty. At least the parts’ shape was retained, and they thoroughly changed the Hunter’s profile! At times I thought that the modified aircraft had a Soviet touch, and when I installed the landing gear it struck me that the pointed nose gave the Hunter a very F-105-ish look, like a missing link between the Thunderchief and the earlier RF-84G Thunderflash? Well, an idea for a potential future what-if project…
Anything else was taken OOB from the Revell kit, including the cockpit and the short drop tanks on the inner wing pylons.
Painting and markings:
This was a challenge. I did not want to give the fictional recce Hunter the J 34’s simple camouflage with dark green upper surfaces (Olive Green 328M) and grey undersides. The contemporary dark blue/olive green paint scheme was an alternative, but I found it to be quite boring and I also already had some Swedish whiffs with this scheme in my collection.
A suitable alternative eventually came from literature, where I found pictures of privately operated J 32E Lansen target tugs (SE-DCM and -DCN) which carried in the early Nineties a three-tone camouflage on their upper sides, consisting of mörk olivgrön (328M), mörkgrön (326M) and mörkblå (438M). I was not able to find pictures that provided detail information about the aircrafts’ concrete camouflage pattern, though, esp. from above, so that I adapted a pattern from an USN aggressor A-4E Skyhawk with adjusted colors to the Hunter airframe. The blue/green pattern on the contemporary J 32 and J 35 could not simply be expanded to a third shade, since the dark blue forms a kind of net pattern over the green background. The lighter green would always have looked like an enforced foreign matter, so that I rather went for an SEA-ish application in which all three colors appear pari passu. The aggressor pattern yet ensured that the dark blue would still form a kind of “river delta” within a murky green landscape.
The paints I used were Humbrol 77, 163 and 224 – lighter than the original tones, but for better contrast, scale effect and some weathering it turned out O.K. The undersides were painted in standard Swedish grey (058M), and I used Humbrol 165 (RAF Medium Sea Grey) as a proxy. The drop tanks were painted in standard J 34 colors, as a small contrast, in Humbrol 116 (FS 34079) and 165.
The cockpit interior was painted in anthracite, the ejection seat received bright green cushions (seen on a Swedish Hunter on museum display); the landing gear and the respective wells’ interior became aluminum bronze (Humbrol 56), while the interior of the air intakes became shiny aluminum (Revell 99) except for the splitter plates, which received the external camouflage colors. Copying the real J 34s’ look, the area around the jet efflux was painted in Aluminum (Revell 99) and separated from the rest of the hull with a thin 0.5 mm black line (generic decal material). The camera windows were created with black decal material, which had some light reflexes manually added and received a coat with glossy varnish.
The kit received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel-shading for dramatic effect, and with markedly lightened tones from above to simulate bleached paint.
The decals/marking came mostly from RBD Studio (today Moose Republic, very good stuff!) sheets for Saab 32 Lansen in Swedish service. The unusual tactical code in the form of a number in the squadron’s color (instead of a colored letter or a white or yellow two-digit numeral that came next) was taken over from a real-world F11 S 32C from around 1963 – an exotic option, but it falls into the S 34B’s time frame and was a suitable option for this whiffy model, too. To reflect the 1st squadron’s code color even more and add a small color highlight, I painted the front wheel well cover in red and placed a white “2” on it.
Finally, the model was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish. The Swedish Hunters’ rather glossy finish was only carried during the aircrafts’ early career years, when the machines still carried the factory finish with British colors under a clear protective coat. When the machines were later re-painted with Swedish paints during overhauls, they received a matt finish.
This modified photo reconnaissance Hunter looks simple, but the nose modifications were more severe and demanding than expected. The result looks pretty strange, esp. the pointed nose takes away the Hunter’s Fifties look. The Swedish markings and the three-tone camouflage suit the Hunter well, though, the S 34B looks quite convincing.
Quarry Bank Mill (also known as Styal Mill) in Styal, Cheshire, England, is one of the best preserved textile mills of the Industrial Revolution and is now a museum of the cotton industry. It is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a designated Grade II* listed building,[1] and inspired the 2013 television series The Mill.
Location
Quarry Bank Mill is on the outskirts of Styal in Cheshire, abutting and to the south of Manchester Airport. The mill is on the bank of the River Bollin which provided water to power the waterwheels. It was connected by road to the Bridgewater Canal for transporting raw cotton from the port of Liverpool.[3] The site consisted of three farms or folds.
History
Samuel Greg leased land at Quarrell Hole on Pownall Fee from Lord Stamford, who imposed a condition that 'none of the surrounding trees should be pruned, felled or lopped´; maintaining the woodland character of the area. The factory was built in 1784 by Greg[4] to spin cotton. When Greg retired in 1832 it was the largest such business in the United Kingdom. The water-powered Georgian mill still produces cotton calico. The Gregs were careful and pragmatic, paternalistic millowners, and the mill was expanded and changed throughout its history. When Greg's son, Robert Hyde Greg, took over the business, he introduced weaving. Samuel Greg died in 1834.
The Mill was attacked during the Plug Plot riots on 10 August 1842.[5]
The mill's iron water wheel, the fourth to be installed, was designed by Thomas Hewes and built between 1816 and 1820. Overhead shafts above the machines were attached to the water wheel by a belt. When the wheel turned, the motion moved the belt and powered the machinery. A beam engine and a horizontal steam engine were subsequently installed to supplement the power. The Hewes wheel broke in 1904 but the River Bollin continued to power the mill through two water turbines. The mill owners bought a Boulton and Watt steam engine in 1810 and a few years later purchased another because the river's water level was low in summer and could interrupt production of cloth during some years. Steam engines could produce power all year round. Today the mill houses the most powerful working waterwheel in Europe, an iron wheel moved from Glasshouses Mill at Pateley Bridge designed by Sir William Fairbairn who had been Hewes' apprentice.
The estate surrounding the mill was developed and Greg converted farm buildings in Styal to house workers. As the mill increased in size, housing was constructed for the workers.[6] A chapel and a school were built by the Gregs who moved into Quarry Bank House next to the mill.
The estate and mill were donated to the National Trust in 1939 by Alexander Carlton Greg and are open to the public. The mill continued in production until 1959. In 2006 the National Trust acquired Quarry Bank House and its gardens and, in 2010, the gardener's house and the upper gardens.[7] In 2013 the mill received 130,000 visitors.[8] In 2013, the trust launched an appeal to raise £1.4 million to restore a worker's cottage, a shop and the Greg's glasshouses and digitise records relating to Gregs and the mill workers.[8]
Architecture
Quarry Bank is an example of an early, rural, cotton-spinning mill that was initially dependent on water power. The first mill was built by Samuel Greg and John Massey in 1784. Its design was functional and unadorned, growing out of the pragmatism of the men who felt no need to make a bold architectural statement.[9] It was a four-storey mill measuring 8.5 metres (28 ft) by 27.5 metres (90 ft), with an attached staircase, counting house and warehouse. It was designed to use water frames which had just come out of patent, and the increased supply of cotton caused by the cessation of the American War of Independence. The water wheel was at the north end of the mill.
The mill was extended in 1796 when it was doubled in length and a fifth floor added. A second wheel was built at the southern end. The mill was extended between 1817 and 1820 and a mansard-roofed wing extended part of the 1796 building forward beneath which the wheel was installed. The new building kept the 1784 detailing with respect to line and windows.[10] The 1784 mill ran 2425 spindles, after 1805 with the new wheel it ran 3452 spindles.[11]
Weaving sheds added in 1836 and 1838 were of two storeys and housed 305 looms.[12] Before the 1830s, spinning mills produced cotton, that was put-out to hand-loom weavers who worked in their own homes or small loom shops, like the one Greg owned at Eyam.[13] Hand-loom weaving continued in parallel to power loom weaving throughout the 19th century. Around 1830 the power loom became sufficiently viable for independent weaving sheds to be set up, and for larger owners to add weaving sheds to their spinning mills. A weaving shed needed the correct light and humidity and a floor that was stable enough to withstand the vibration caused by the picking of many looms. Quarry Bank Mill is of national significance in that it used two-storey side-lit buildings rather the a single storey sheds with a saw-tooth roof.[14] The first two-storey shed at Quarry Bank was 33 metres (108 ft) by 6.5 metres (21 ft). The 1838 building was 30 metres (98 ft) by 10 metres (33 ft) to which a storey was added in 1842 for warping and beaming. In the Gregs pragmatic way, looms were purchased gradually.[15]
Water power
The first wheel was a wooden overshot wheel taking water by means of a long leat from upstream on the River Bollin. The second wheel built by Peter Ewart in 1801 was wooden. To increase power he dammed the Bollin and took water into the mill directly, the tailrace leaving the river below the dam. The third wheel of 1807 was a replacement for one of the wooden wheels.[16] It is believed it was a suspension wheel, 8 metres (26 ft) in diameter made from iron to the design of Thomas Hewes.[11]
The fourth wheel, the Great Wheel was also designed by Hewes. The challenge was to increase the head of water acting on the wheel while using the same volume of water. It was achieved by sinking the wheel pit to below the level of the river and taking the tail race through a tunnel a kilometre downstream to rejoin the Bollin at Giant's Castle. This gave a head of 32 feet (9.8 m) acting on the 32 feet (9.8 m) diameter suspension wheel- which is 21 feet (6.4 m) wide. The Great Wheel operated from 1818 to 1871 when the mill pool had silted up, and then to 1904.[17]
In 1905 two water turbines built by Gilbert Gilkes and Company were installed to replace the Great Wheel. They used the same head and tail race and operated until 1959.[18] When the mill was restored in 1983, a 25 feet (7.6 m) diameter waterwheel of similar design to that of Hewes by his pupil Sir William Fairbairn, was moved from Glasshouses Mill in Pateley Bridge and installed to provide power to work the machinery.
Steam power
Water flow from the Bollin was unreliable so an auxiliary steam engine was procured in 1810.[16] It was a 10 hp beam engine from Boulton and Watt. In 1836 with the arrival of power looms a second 20 hp Boulton and Watt beam engine was acquired. The first horizontal condensing engine was acquired in 1871. A new engine house was built. In 1906 the 1871 engine was replaced by a second-hand 60 hp engine.[19] The engines no longer exist and the museum has purchased a similar steam engine to display.
Apprentice system
The Apprentice House
Quarry Bank Mill employed child apprentices, a system that continued until 1847. The last child to be indentured started work in 1841. The first children apprentices lived in lodgings in the neighbourhood then in 1790 Greg built the Apprentice House near the factory.[20] Greg believed he could get the best out of his workers by treating them fairly. He hired a superintendent to attend to their care and morals and members of the Greg family and external tutors gave them lessons.[20] Greg employed Peter Holland, father of the Royal Physician Sir Henry Holland, 1st Baronet and uncle of Elizabeth Gaskell, as mill doctor. Holland was responsible for the health of the children and other workers, and was the first doctor to be employed in such a capacity. The apprentices were children from workhouses. Initially, they were brought from Hackney and Chelsea but by 1834 they came mostly from neighbouring parishes or Liverpool poorhouses.[20] They worked long days with schoolwork and gardening after their shift at the mill. The work was sometimes dangerous, with fingers sometimes being severed by the machines.[21] Children were willing to work in the mill because life at a workhouse was even worse.[22]
Mill community
The sparse accommodation that existed when the Gregs built the mill was soon exhausted and Greg built plain cottages which were rented to his workers. Each house had a parlour, kitchen and two bedrooms, an outside privy and a small garden. Rent was deducted from the workers' wages.[20] Greg, like Robert Owen, who built New Lanark attempted to bring the structured order of a country village to his new industrial centres. He built Oak School to educate the children and the Norcliffe Chapel where the villagers worshipped and held a Sunday school.
wikipedia
Three U.S. Coast Guard aircraft fly past the Fleet Week spectators in San Francisco.
The lead aircraft is an Alenia/Lockheed Martin HC-27J Spartan, USCG 2713. This aircraft was originally procured by the U.S. Air Force as C-27J 09-27022, c/n 4169. It is based at the U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Sacramento.
Following the Spartan are two Aerospatiale MH-65D Dolphin helicopters, USCG 6586 and 6595. Helicopter 6586 is painted in a special two-color scheme to commemorate the centennial of US Coast Guard aviation. Both of these helicopters are based at the U.S. Coast Guard Air Station San Francisco.
Fleet Week 2017
San Francisco