View allAll Photos Tagged Refinement
The Launch 22v is the perfect combination of size, refinement and performance. This 22.5-foot wakeboard boat welcomes a crew of 15 with room for gear and an interior geared toward luxurious accommodation. Completely redesigned for 2012, the 22V interior brings together intricate sections of multi-textured Syntec Nanoblock vinyls with the durability of exclusive Gore Tenara thread. Triple density foam construction makes the Launch interior as comfortable as it is eye-catching. Supra has made the high-traffic path from the lounge to the swim step worry-free with a newly tooled rear seat step and transom walk-over covered in SeaDeck no-slip padding. The wakes are pro caliber and controllable with cockpit switch or the VISION dash, but the 22V is as much about the drive as it is the ride. Slicing through rough water with flat precise turns, the 22V is exhilarating to drive. The high and slow speed maneuvers are almost as impressive as you will look pulling them off. Available with a walk-through bow as a Sunsport or with the Launch playpen, the 22V captures your water sports boating lifestyle.
Overall Length w/o Platform: 22'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform: 24'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform & Trailer: 26' 4"
Width (Beam): 100"
Overall Width w/ Trailer: 102"
Draft: 25"
Weight - Boat only: 3900 lbs
Weight - Boat and Trailer: 5000 lbs
Capacity - Passenger: 15
Capacity - Weight: 2,100 lbs
Capacity - Fuel: 50 gals
Capacity - Ballast: 1450 lbs
Engine - Electronic Fuel Injection: 330 HP 5.7 L MPI w/ CAT
The Launch 22v is the perfect combination of size, refinement and performance. This 22.5-foot wakeboard boat welcomes a crew of 15 with room for gear and an interior geared toward luxurious accommodation. Completely redesigned for 2012, the 22V interior brings together intricate sections of multi-textured Syntec Nanoblock vinyls with the durability of exclusive Gore Tenara thread. Triple density foam construction makes the Launch interior as comfortable as it is eye-catching. Supra has made the high-traffic path from the lounge to the swim step worry-free with a newly tooled rear seat step and transom walk-over covered in SeaDeck no-slip padding. The wakes are pro caliber and controllable with cockpit switch or the VISION dash, but the 22V is as much about the drive as it is the ride. Slicing through rough water with flat precise turns, the 22V is exhilarating to drive. The high and slow speed maneuvers are almost as impressive as you will look pulling them off. Available with a walk-through bow as a Sunsport or with the Launch playpen, the 22V captures your water sports boating lifestyle.
Overall Length w/o Platform: 22'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform: 24'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform & Trailer: 26' 4"
Width (Beam): 100"
Overall Width w/ Trailer: 102"
Draft: 25"
Weight - Boat only: 3900 lbs
Weight - Boat and Trailer: 5000 lbs
Capacity - Passenger: 15
Capacity - Weight: 2,100 lbs
Capacity - Fuel: 50 gals
Capacity - Ballast: 1450 lbs
Engine - Electronic Fuel Injection: 330 HP 5.7 L MPI w/ CAT
L'Anima - a gourmet Italian restaurant in the City of London, near Finnsbury Square and Liverpool Street.
Its passionate Chef Francesco is half-Calabrian and half Sicilian who keeps a tight grip on the proceedings of his kitchen ran by 40 staff - all Italians, except for a delightful German lady whose presence adds Anglo-Saxon elegance to an otherwise very Mediterranean environment: don't get me wrong L'Anima is no run-of-the-mill trattoria decorated with lamps made of Chianti bottles.
The interior decoration is restrained and minimalist that exudes refinement without ostentation.
Its kitchen, by far larger than the space of the bar and restaurant is a model of well-equipped modernity with no money spared for the best utensils: they bake their own bread on the premises.
And the food? What kind of food is it?
Francesco is uncompromising about his traditional family cuisine, taught by his 'mamma' and his nonna: he called it "traditional Italian family cuisine with a twist!" - that is HIS version of Southern Italy - Calabrese, Puglian, Sicilian with occasional concessions to Tuscany, Veneto or Roman...
The monthly Saturday cookery course is a mixture of demonstration, hands-on cooking, degustation, competition with the prize of a (black) truffle the size of a chicken egg and a three course meal for twenty with white wine from Aosta red wine from the the volcanic slopes of the Etna and a red desert wine.
Ah I forgot the "Italian breakfast" of coffee, bread, butter and four jams. Said an American lady registered for the course; "Francesco next time you do not give us this bullshit you give us instead coffee with a shot of grappa, like the Italian working classes have for breakfast".
Well, grappa is a great leveler, so we drank to that at the end of the lunch.
Francesco-s personality is larger than life: his staff are grateful and are kept on the straight and narrow; i asked him if he shouted in the kitchen he gave an unapologetic "yes". But do you swear? i asked looking at his staff whose faces were sheepish - a mixture of a smirk with an embarrasment - well this WAS my answer - I can't remember what he said...
Francesco's cuisine is prodigal: does he look forward to having a star in the Michelin? He denies it. He says that he is true to himself, regardless. He has somewhere posted a list of the 100 best restaurants in Britain: at the top of the list there is this rural eatery on the Thames Valley, somewhere, which was shut for several weeks by the food inspectors for having poisoned its hosts. L'Anima was amongst the top 20 on this list, more precisely at number 17. Maybe it should start poisoning its clients to gain the first place: "i do not make concession to my clients. Once one gets famous one could do what one likes.". Francesco is a likeable and diplomatic presence, but as most talented people go, he must be difficult to work for. But his staff is glad to work for l"Anima which they helped up the slippery ladder of the gourmet restaurants in London.
Thank you Francesco!
Thank you too to the friendly presence of Francesco's American financial backers and great gourmet connoisseurs who added colour, spontaneity and warmth to our course. (not forgetting the young and distinguished Oxonian-Finno_Brits who stimulated the conversation).
More informations here styleandaddict.blogspot.fr/
[annaA], Loordes of London, Birth, French Vintage Couture,
Slurl Summer Time Fair : maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Taj%20Mahal/83/201/21
Design concept refinements for the interior of a new bank branch to be built inside the shell of a former car dealership
Tweaked, textured, and tortured in the digital darkroom……and here we are. Capture, process, and refinement…..all part of the journey!
It started put as a single image captured as I explored the many alleys and cobblestone streets that make up the town of Arles in the Provincial region of France. The result here has a little bit of that old world Cuba feel to it, but I’ve never been to Cuba and this is France, so I’m shooting from the hip again…..
It was one of those casual late afternoons. The tripod was back at the room as I was out on this little scouting mission of sorts. Most of the town seemed to be in that “siesta” kinda of mode. The lighting wasn’t great this time of day, but I know that there were a few cool scenes in this little town to explore. Sometimes the mission for me is to capture “foundational images”, ones that I can later use as the building blocks for something more creative in the digital darkroom. Photoshop is one of those programs that can have a person on a perpetual journey of learning and creative exploration. Continually sdding to my library of images to “play with” continues to be one of the driving forces for the trips I like to take.
As always, more on the blog.....
For more from MDSimages, please check out the links below....and thanks for stopping by!
Villa GRO (Eden House) was one of the very first villas on the island of St Barts¦. It has now become one of the finest contemporary achievements of the island. It also boasts an exceptional location with a path directly accessing the sea and double exposure both to Marigot Bay on one side and the Atlantic Ocean on the other.
The nature of its Garden of Eden designed by landscape gardener, Frederic de Sainte Preuve, only adds to its originality. Sober lines, refined purity with a decidedly minimalist and an almost monastic style.
At a first glance, this villa seems relatively austere with its grey rendered concrete; however, gradually notes of incredible joviality are progressively revealed. An exterior fuchsia wall. Vivid, lively, acidulous and fresh colors in the three bedrooms which are designed identically, but each with their own distinct hue: aniseed, fuchsia and turquoise.
The bedroom furniture is a reference in the field of design: MDF Italia beds, Artemide lamps and linens from the collections of Valerie Barkowski and Mia Zia. A remarkable alchemy and contemporary timeless elegance. The vast cembonit floored reception area unites the living room, dining room and kitchen in the same open plan space, which opens onto the concrete pool and the deck shaded by grey nautical awnings supported by massive stainless steel bars.
The Ground piece sofas (Flexform), the MDF coffee table, the Hudson Starck (Emeco) chairs have found their perfect setting. As does the exterior furniture outside: the Gandia Blasco lounge chairs (Spain), the MDF Italia table and the Longframe chairs (Alias). Eden House is bounderless bold and daring architecture has remarkably blended into the landscape of the island becoming an integral part of its surroundings. This property immediately charms you not only by a series of extraordinary details, but also by its aesthetic sensual atmosphere and gentle, contemporary refinement. Villa GRO is a pure gem, quite simply a celebration of joy and happiness.
Built in 1895-1896, this Chicago School-style thirteen-story skyscraper was designed by Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler for the Guaranty Construction Company. It was initially commissioned by Hascal L. Taylor, whom approached Dankmar Adler to build "the largest and best office building in the city,” but Taylor, whom wanted to name the building after himself, died in 1894, just before the building was announced. Having already had the building designed and ready for construction, the Guaranty Construction Company of Chicago, which already had resources lined up to build the project, bought the property and had the building constructed, with the building instead being named after them. In 1898, the building was renamed after the Prudential Insurance Company, which had refinanced the project and became a major tenant in the building after it was completed. Prudential had the terra cotta panels above the main entrances to the building modified to display the company’s name in 1898, upon their acquisition of a partial share in the ownership of the tower. The building became the tallest building in Buffalo upon its completion, and was a further refinement of the ideas that Sullivan had developed with the Wainwright Building in St. Louis, which was built in 1890-92, and featured a design with more Classical overtones, which were dropped with the design of the Guaranty Building in favor of a more purified Art Nouveau and Chicago School aesthetic, and with more intricate visual detail, with the ornate terra cotta panels cladding the entire structure, leaving very few areas with sparse detail. The building is an early skyscraper with a steel frame supporting the terra cotta panel facade, a departure from earlier load bearing masonry structures that had previously been predominant in many of the same applications, and expresses this through large window openings at the base and a consistent wall thickness, as there was no need to make the exterior walls thicker at the base to support the load from the structure above. The building also contrasts with the more rigid historically-influenced Classical revivalism that was growing in popularity at the time, and follows Sullivan’s mantra of “form ever follows function” despite having a lot of unnecessary detail on the exterior cladding and interior elements. The building’s facade also emphasizes its verticality through continual vertical bands of windows separated by pilasters that are wider on the first two floors, with narrower pilasters above, with the entire composition of the building following the tripartite form influenced by classical columns, with distinct sections comprising the base, shaft, and capital, though being a radical and bold abstraction of the form compared to the historical literalism expressed by most of its contemporaries, more directly displaying the underlying steel structure of the building.
The building is clad in rusty terra cotta panels which feature extensive Sullivanesque ornament inspired by the Art Nouveau movement, which clad the entirety of the building’s facades along Church Street and Pearl Street, with simpler red brick and painted brick cladding on the facades that do not front public right-of-ways, which are visible when the building is viewed from the south and west. The white painted brick cladding on the south elevation marks the former location of the building’s light well, which was about 30 feet wide and 68 feet deep, and was infilled during a 1980s rehabilitation project, adding an additional 1,400 square feet of office space, and necessitating an artificial light source to be installed above the stained glass ceiling of the building’s lobby. The building’s windows are mostly one-over-one double-hung windows in vertical columns, with one window per bay, though this pattern is broken at the painted portions of the non-principal facades, which feature paired one-over-one windows, on the second floor of the principal facades, which features Chicago-style tripartite windows and arched transoms over the building’s two main entry doors, on the thirteenth floor of the principal facades, which features circular oxeye windows, and at the base, which features large storefront windows that include cantilevered sections with shed glass roofs that wrap around the columns at the base of the building. The building’s terra cotta panels feature many natural and geometric motifs based on plants and crystalline structures, the most common being a “seed pod” motif that symbolizes growth, with a wide variation of patterns, giving the facade a dynamic appearance, which is almost overwhelming, but helps to further grant the building a dignified and monumental appearance, and is a signature element of many of the significant works of Adler and Sullivan, as well as Sullivan’s later independent work. The building’s pilasters halve in number but double in thickness towards the base, with wide window openings underneath pairs of window bays above on the first and second floors, with the pilasters terminating at circular columns with large, decorative, ornate terra cotta capitals in the central bays, and thick rectilinear pilasters at the corners and flanking the entry door openings. The circular columns penetrate the extruded storefront windows and shed glass roofs below, which formed display cases for shops in the ground floor of the building when it first opened, and feature decorative copper trim and mullions framing the large expanses of plate glass. The base of the building is clad in medina sandstone panels, as well as medina sandstone bases on the circular columns. The major entry doors feature decorative copper trim surrounds, a spandrel panel with ornate cast copper detailing above and the name “Guaranty” emblazoned on the face of each of the two panels at the two entrances, decorative transoms above with decorative copper panels as headers, and arched transoms on the second floor with decorative terra cotta trim surrounds. Each of the two major entrance doors is flanked by two ornate Art Nouveau-style wall-mounted sconces mounted on the large pilasters, with smaller, partially recessed pilasters on either side. The building features two cornices with arched recesses, with the smaller cornice running as a belt around the transition between the base and the shaft portions of the building, with lightbulbs in each archway, and the larger cornice, which extends further out from the face of the building, running around the top of the building’s Swan Street and Pearl Street facades, with a circular oxeye window in each archway. The lower corner recessed into the facade at the ends, while the upper cornice runs around the entire top of the facade above, with geometric motifs in the central portions and a large cluster of leaves in a pattern that is often repeated in Sullivan’s other work at the corners. The spandrel panels between the windows on the shaft portion of the building feature a cluster of leaves at the base and geometric patterns above, with a repeat of the same recessed arch detail as the cornice at the sill line of each window. The pilasters feature almost strictly geometric motifs, with a few floral motifs thrown in at key points to balance the composition of the facade with the windows. A small and often overlooked feature of the ground floor is a set of stone steps up to an entrance at the northwest corner of the building, which features a decorative copper railing with Sullivanesque and Art Nouveau-inspired ornament, which sits next to a staircase to the building’s basement, which features a more utilitarian modern safety railing in the middle.
The interior of the building was heavily renovated over the years before being partially restored in 1980, with the lobby being reverted back to its circa 1896 appearance. The Swan Street vestibule has been fully restored, featuring a marble ceiling, decorative mosaics around the top of the walls, a decorative antique brass light fixture with Art Nouveau detailing and a ring of lightbulbs in the center, the remnant bronze stringer of a now-removed staircase to the second floor in a circular glass wall at the north end of the space, and a terazzo floor. The main lobby, located immediately to the west, features a Tiffany-esque stained glass ceiling with ellipsoid and circular panels set into a bronze frame that once sat below a skylight at the base of the building’s filled-in light well, marble cladding on the walls, mosaics on the ceiling and around the top of the walls, a bronze staircase with ornate railing at the west end of the space, which features a semi-circular landing, a basement staircase with a brass railing, a terrazzo floor, and multiple historic three-bulb wall sconces, as well as brass ceiling fixtures matching those in the vestibule. The building’s elevators, located in an alcove near the base of the staircase, features a decorative richly detailed brass screen on the exterior, with additional decorative screens above, with the elevator since having been enclosed with glass to accommodate modern safety standards and equipment, while preserving the visibility of the original details. Originally, when the building was built, the elevators descended open shafts into a screen wall in the lobby, with the elevators originally being manufactured by the Sprague Electric Railway and Motor Company, with these being exchanged in 1903 for water hydraulic elevators that remained until a renovation in the 1960s. Sadly, most of the historic interior detailing of the upper floors was lost during a series of renovations in the 20th Century, which led to them being fully modernized during the renovation in the 1980s, with multiple tenant finish projects since then further modifying the interiors of the upper floors.
The building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1973, and designated a National Historic Landmark in 1975, owing to its architectural significance, and to help save the building, which had suffered a major fire in 1974 that led to the city of Buffalo seeking to demolish it. A renovation in the early 1980s managed to modernize the building while restoring the lobby and the exterior, which was carried out under the direction of the firm CannonDesign, and partial funding from federal historic tax credits. The building was purchased in 2002 by Hodgson Russ, a law firm, which subsequently further renovated the building to suit their needs, converting the building into their headquarters in 2008. This renovation was carried out under the direction of Gensler Architects and the local firm Flynn Battaglia Architects. The building today houses offices on the upper floors, with a visitor center, known as the Guaranty Interpretative Center, on the first floor, with historic tours offered of some of the building’s exterior and interior spaces run by Preservation Buffalo Niagara. The building was one of the most significant early skyscrapers, and set a precedent for the modern skyscrapers that began to be built half a century later.
Built in 1895-1896, this Chicago School-style thirteen-story skyscraper was designed by Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler for the Guaranty Construction Company. It was initially commissioned by Hascal L. Taylor, whom approached Dankmar Adler to build "the largest and best office building in the city,” but Taylor, whom wanted to name the building after himself, died in 1894, just before the building was announced. Having already had the building designed and ready for construction, the Guaranty Construction Company of Chicago, which already had resources lined up to build the project, bought the property and had the building constructed, with the building instead being named after them. In 1898, the building was renamed after the Prudential Insurance Company, which had refinanced the project and became a major tenant in the building after it was completed. Prudential had the terra cotta panels above the main entrances to the building modified to display the company’s name in 1898, upon their acquisition of a partial share in the ownership of the tower. The building became the tallest building in Buffalo upon its completion, and was a further refinement of the ideas that Sullivan had developed with the Wainwright Building in St. Louis, which was built in 1890-92, and featured a design with more Classical overtones, which were dropped with the design of the Guaranty Building in favor of a more purified Art Nouveau and Chicago School aesthetic, and with more intricate visual detail, with the ornate terra cotta panels cladding the entire structure, leaving very few areas with sparse detail. The building is an early skyscraper with a steel frame supporting the terra cotta panel facade, a departure from earlier load bearing masonry structures that had previously been predominant in many of the same applications, and expresses this through large window openings at the base and a consistent wall thickness, as there was no need to make the exterior walls thicker at the base to support the load from the structure above. The building also contrasts with the more rigid historically-influenced Classical revivalism that was growing in popularity at the time, and follows Sullivan’s mantra of “form ever follows function” despite having a lot of unnecessary detail on the exterior cladding and interior elements. The building’s facade also emphasizes its verticality through continual vertical bands of windows separated by pilasters that are wider on the first two floors, with narrower pilasters above, with the entire composition of the building following the tripartite form influenced by classical columns, with distinct sections comprising the base, shaft, and capital, though being a radical and bold abstraction of the form compared to the historical literalism expressed by most of its contemporaries, more directly displaying the underlying steel structure of the building.
The building is clad in rusty terra cotta panels which feature extensive Sullivanesque ornament inspired by the Art Nouveau movement, which clad the entirety of the building’s facades along Church Street and Pearl Street, with simpler red brick and painted brick cladding on the facades that do not front public right-of-ways, which are visible when the building is viewed from the south and west. The white painted brick cladding on the south elevation marks the former location of the building’s light well, which was about 30 feet wide and 68 feet deep, and was infilled during a 1980s rehabilitation project, adding an additional 1,400 square feet of office space, and necessitating an artificial light source to be installed above the stained glass ceiling of the building’s lobby. The building’s windows are mostly one-over-one double-hung windows in vertical columns, with one window per bay, though this pattern is broken at the painted portions of the non-principal facades, which feature paired one-over-one windows, on the second floor of the principal facades, which features Chicago-style tripartite windows and arched transoms over the building’s two main entry doors, on the thirteenth floor of the principal facades, which features circular oxeye windows, and at the base, which features large storefront windows that include cantilevered sections with shed glass roofs that wrap around the columns at the base of the building. The building’s terra cotta panels feature many natural and geometric motifs based on plants and crystalline structures, the most common being a “seed pod” motif that symbolizes growth, with a wide variation of patterns, giving the facade a dynamic appearance, which is almost overwhelming, but helps to further grant the building a dignified and monumental appearance, and is a signature element of many of the significant works of Adler and Sullivan, as well as Sullivan’s later independent work. The building’s pilasters halve in number but double in thickness towards the base, with wide window openings underneath pairs of window bays above on the first and second floors, with the pilasters terminating at circular columns with large, decorative, ornate terra cotta capitals in the central bays, and thick rectilinear pilasters at the corners and flanking the entry door openings. The circular columns penetrate the extruded storefront windows and shed glass roofs below, which formed display cases for shops in the ground floor of the building when it first opened, and feature decorative copper trim and mullions framing the large expanses of plate glass. The base of the building is clad in medina sandstone panels, as well as medina sandstone bases on the circular columns. The major entry doors feature decorative copper trim surrounds, a spandrel panel with ornate cast copper detailing above and the name “Guaranty” emblazoned on the face of each of the two panels at the two entrances, decorative transoms above with decorative copper panels as headers, and arched transoms on the second floor with decorative terra cotta trim surrounds. Each of the two major entrance doors is flanked by two ornate Art Nouveau-style wall-mounted sconces mounted on the large pilasters, with smaller, partially recessed pilasters on either side. The building features two cornices with arched recesses, with the smaller cornice running as a belt around the transition between the base and the shaft portions of the building, with lightbulbs in each archway, and the larger cornice, which extends further out from the face of the building, running around the top of the building’s Swan Street and Pearl Street facades, with a circular oxeye window in each archway. The lower corner recessed into the facade at the ends, while the upper cornice runs around the entire top of the facade above, with geometric motifs in the central portions and a large cluster of leaves in a pattern that is often repeated in Sullivan’s other work at the corners. The spandrel panels between the windows on the shaft portion of the building feature a cluster of leaves at the base and geometric patterns above, with a repeat of the same recessed arch detail as the cornice at the sill line of each window. The pilasters feature almost strictly geometric motifs, with a few floral motifs thrown in at key points to balance the composition of the facade with the windows. A small and often overlooked feature of the ground floor is a set of stone steps up to an entrance at the northwest corner of the building, which features a decorative copper railing with Sullivanesque and Art Nouveau-inspired ornament, which sits next to a staircase to the building’s basement, which features a more utilitarian modern safety railing in the middle.
The interior of the building was heavily renovated over the years before being partially restored in 1980, with the lobby being reverted back to its circa 1896 appearance. The Swan Street vestibule has been fully restored, featuring a marble ceiling, decorative mosaics around the top of the walls, a decorative antique brass light fixture with Art Nouveau detailing and a ring of lightbulbs in the center, the remnant bronze stringer of a now-removed staircase to the second floor in a circular glass wall at the north end of the space, and a terazzo floor. The main lobby, located immediately to the west, features a Tiffany-esque stained glass ceiling with ellipsoid and circular panels set into a bronze frame that once sat below a skylight at the base of the building’s filled-in light well, marble cladding on the walls, mosaics on the ceiling and around the top of the walls, a bronze staircase with ornate railing at the west end of the space, which features a semi-circular landing, a basement staircase with a brass railing, a terrazzo floor, and multiple historic three-bulb wall sconces, as well as brass ceiling fixtures matching those in the vestibule. The building’s elevators, located in an alcove near the base of the staircase, features a decorative richly detailed brass screen on the exterior, with additional decorative screens above, with the elevator since having been enclosed with glass to accommodate modern safety standards and equipment, while preserving the visibility of the original details. Originally, when the building was built, the elevators descended open shafts into a screen wall in the lobby, with the elevators originally being manufactured by the Sprague Electric Railway and Motor Company, with these being exchanged in 1903 for water hydraulic elevators that remained until a renovation in the 1960s. Sadly, most of the historic interior detailing of the upper floors was lost during a series of renovations in the 20th Century, which led to them being fully modernized during the renovation in the 1980s, with multiple tenant finish projects since then further modifying the interiors of the upper floors.
The building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1973, and designated a National Historic Landmark in 1975, owing to its architectural significance, and to help save the building, which had suffered a major fire in 1974 that led to the city of Buffalo seeking to demolish it. A renovation in the early 1980s managed to modernize the building while restoring the lobby and the exterior, which was carried out under the direction of the firm CannonDesign, and partial funding from federal historic tax credits. The building was purchased in 2002 by Hodgson Russ, a law firm, which subsequently further renovated the building to suit their needs, converting the building into their headquarters in 2008. This renovation was carried out under the direction of Gensler Architects and the local firm Flynn Battaglia Architects. The building today houses offices on the upper floors, with a visitor center, known as the Guaranty Interpretative Center, on the first floor, with historic tours offered of some of the building’s exterior and interior spaces run by Preservation Buffalo Niagara. The building was one of the most significant early skyscrapers, and set a precedent for the modern skyscrapers that began to be built half a century later.
The department has been building up a library of design related reference books over the last few years. Pupils are encouraged to make use of these books on a regular basis. The photographs here demonstrate the tremendous wealth of content contained therein.
The sequence has been shot in such a way that the cover of the book is shown first and a few sample pages are included to give the student an idea of the content the book contains. Pupils may then approach staff and request a short term loan.
The Launch 22v is the perfect combination of size, refinement and performance. This 22.5-foot wakeboard boat welcomes a crew of 15 with room for gear and an interior geared toward luxurious accommodation. Completely redesigned for 2012, the 22V interior brings together intricate sections of multi-textured Syntec Nanoblock vinyls with the durability of exclusive Gore Tenara thread. Triple density foam construction makes the Launch interior as comfortable as it is eye-catching. Supra has made the high-traffic path from the lounge to the swim step worry-free with a newly tooled rear seat step and transom walk-over covered in SeaDeck no-slip padding. The wakes are pro caliber and controllable with cockpit switch or the VISION dash, but the 22V is as much about the drive as it is the ride. Slicing through rough water with flat precise turns, the 22V is exhilarating to drive. The high and slow speed maneuvers are almost as impressive as you will look pulling them off. Available with a walk-through bow as a Sunsport or with the Launch playpen, the 22V captures your water sports boating lifestyle.
Overall Length w/o Platform: 22'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform: 24'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform & Trailer: 26' 4"
Width (Beam): 100"
Overall Width w/ Trailer: 102"
Draft: 25"
Weight - Boat only: 3900 lbs
Weight - Boat and Trailer: 5000 lbs
Capacity - Passenger: 15
Capacity - Weight: 2,100 lbs
Capacity - Fuel: 50 gals
Capacity - Ballast: 1450 lbs
Engine - Electronic Fuel Injection: 330 HP 5.7 L MPI w/ CAT
Refinement Vanessa wasn't my first choice for leading lady! I originally envisioned Nocturnal Gloss Vanessa in the role but then I saw Veronique and I had to make some changes!
The Maison Autrique, architect Victor Horta 's first building of note. Hallway.
After an awarded renovation, a museum today. Schaerbeek, Brussels.
This an early work of Horta, but u see already here the birth of art nouveau : the refinement, the use of natural light, the lines, the curves, etc.
And I'm happy to have used a little the mirroring, a Horta way to create extra space.
*
The museum has received an interior design by the marvellous comic book artists team Schuiten & Peeters.
*
"Pierre Auguste Renoir came from humble origins, and he always felt that his art lacked refinement. In 1881, confronting the limitations of the Impressionist style he had practiced up to that point, he decided to fill an educational gap by going to Italy to study ancient and Renaissance masterpieces. He probably painted this still life en route, in the south of France (along the Mediterranean coast, or Midi). It features an exotic combination of fruits and vegetables—peppers, eggplants, tomatoes, pomegranates, citrons, lemons, and oranges—breaking the unwritten rule that painters should select foods for their culinary compatibility rather than their visual appeal.
Renoir's arrangement of objects in and around a blue-and-white plate is abundant but stable, and the background elements—a plain, white tablecloth and solid, blue-green wall—are even austere. The still-life genre allowed the artist to concentrate on form and local color. He deliberately weighed the relative placement of each fruit and vegetable, lending them a certain monumentality by using long, diagonal brush strokes. As unpretentious as this work appears, it represents a significant attempt on Renoir's part to bring a classical sense of pictorial structure and balance to the fleeting luminosity of Impressionism—a goal that was pursued even more avidly by Paul Cézanne. Indeed, Renoir visited Cézanne in Provence on his journey back to Paris from Italy, and, although Fruits of the Midi was not painted under Cézanne's direct influence, it does show that these two very different artists shared some fundamental aims. "
The Launch 22v is the perfect combination of size, refinement and performance. This 22.5-foot wakeboard boat welcomes a crew of 15 with room for gear and an interior geared toward luxurious accommodation. Completely redesigned for 2012, the 22V interior brings together intricate sections of multi-textured Syntec Nanoblock vinyls with the durability of exclusive Gore Tenara thread. Triple density foam construction makes the Launch interior as comfortable as it is eye-catching. Supra has made the high-traffic path from the lounge to the swim step worry-free with a newly tooled rear seat step and transom walk-over covered in SeaDeck no-slip padding. The wakes are pro caliber and controllable with cockpit switch or the VISION dash, but the 22V is as much about the drive as it is the ride. Slicing through rough water with flat precise turns, the 22V is exhilarating to drive. The high and slow speed maneuvers are almost as impressive as you will look pulling them off. Available with a walk-through bow as a Sunsport or with the Launch playpen, the 22V captures your water sports boating lifestyle.
Overall Length w/o Platform: 22'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform: 24'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform & Trailer: 26' 4"
Width (Beam): 100"
Overall Width w/ Trailer: 102"
Draft: 25"
Weight - Boat only: 3900 lbs
Weight - Boat and Trailer: 5000 lbs
Capacity - Passenger: 15
Capacity - Weight: 2,100 lbs
Capacity - Fuel: 50 gals
Capacity - Ballast: 1450 lbs
Engine - Electronic Fuel Injection: 330 HP 5.7 L MPI w/ CAT
Glenn H. Curtiss is considered the "Father of the Flying Boat," having developed the first practical and highly successful flying boat in 1913. His interest in aircraft that could operate from water was spurred almost as soon as he entered the nascent field of aeronautics. In 1911, Curtiss was awarded the prestigious Collier Trophy for the development of the hydroaeroplane (a land airplane mounted on floats) and he won the Trophy again the following year in recognition of his continued refinement of the design. In 1913, the Smithsonian Institution bestowed its Langley Medal upon Curtiss for these contributions to flight.
In January 1911 Curtiss flew one of his standard Model D pusher biplanes fitted with floats from the waters off San Diego, California. He later modified this airplane with the addition of wingtip floats for lateral balance. This aircraft was the basis of the early Curtiss Model E hydroaeroplane.
In 1911, Curtiss offered his standard Model E land airplane with engines ranging from a 40-horsepower four-cylinder to a 75-horsepower V8. The 75-horsepower version was also offered as a hydroaeroplane. Floats for the hydro version weighed 125 pounds and could be installed by trained mechanics in two hours.
The first airplane purchased by the U.S. Navy was a Curtiss Model E hydroaeroplane and was given the Navy designation A-1 in early 1911. The Navy purchased a second Model E in July 1911, with a more powerful 80-horsepower Curtiss OX engine, and designated it the A-2. It was also known as the OWL, standing for Over Water and Land. Modifications of the A-2 by the Navy led to re-designations of E-1 and later AX-1. These modifications, done at the Curtiss plant at Hammondsport, New York, included moving the seats from the lower wing to the float and enclosing the crew area with a fabric-covered framework, giving the aircraft the appearance of a short-hull flying boat.
The OWL, with its modified float, was developed into a true flying boat (the entire fuselage being a hull as opposed to mounting the aircraft on a separate float) by Curtiss in 1912, first with the Model D Flying Boat, and then a refined version, the Model E. The Model E Flying Boat was the first truly practical flying boat. It was powered by either a 60- or a 75-horsepower Curtiss V8 engine. Both the U.S. Army and Navy purchased Curtiss Model E Flying Boats, the Navy designating it the C-1.
The most successful version of the pre-war Curtiss flying boats was the Model F, which was produced in far greater numbers than any of the other models. It was offered in many variants and continued in production until 1919. The Navy designated it the C-2. The Model F perfected the flying boat design with the incorporation of a V hull, supplanting the less efficient flat-bottomed hull of the Model E. The Model F was well received by U.S. military and civilian markets, and with the onset of the First World War, Curtiss enjoyed substantial success abroad as well with sales of the Model F to England, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, and Japan.
During the course of his hydroaeroplane and flying boat development, Glenn Curtiss incorporated design innovations that made the seaplane a practical reality, beginning with the enclose hull, covered with fabric for strength and water tightness. Curtiss, with assistance from Royal Navy engineer Lt. John Cyril Porte, further enhanced the ability of waterborne aircraft to get off the water by constructing a mid-way "step" on the bottom of the float or hull. Water has adhesive qualities, especially when running over a curved surface, and early seaplanes had difficulty getting "unstuck" from the water, especially in calm seas. The addition of the step helped break up the water flow under the hull enabling the flying boat to get airborne more easily. Curtiss also added breather tubes to the flying boat hull. These were small copper tubes that ran from the inside of the hull to the undersurface step to relieve the low pressure under the hull and assisted the aircraft in becoming airborne.
Among the Curtiss Model E Flying Boats produced in 1913 was one sold to Logan A. "Jack" Vilas of Chicago. Vilas' Model E was powered by a 90-horsepower Curtiss OX engine. With this aircraft, Vilas made the first crossing of Lake Michigan, flying from St. Joseph, Michigan, to Grant Park on Chicago's waterfront in July 1913. Vilas donated the hull of his Model E Flying Boat to the Smithsonian Institution in 1949. Nothing else of the aircraft survives.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The SAAB B31 was a Swedish jet-powered multirole aircraft, originally designed to serve as a tactical bomber, ground attack, reconnaissance and interceptor aircraft. In the aftermath of the Second World War, Sweden set about the rebuilding and modernization of its armed forces. Regarding aviation, jet propulsion had been identified as the powerplant of the future, and experience with the SAAB 21R, which had been converted from a propeller-pusher aircraft into a jet-powered fighter and attack aircraft in 1947, bolstered confidence in the home industry’s competence. The Saab 21R was only an interim solution, though. One hundred and twenty-four aircraft were planned but this number was reduced to only 64 and they were mainly used as fighter-bombers. The Flygvapnet’s standard post-war bomber, the Saab 18, a twin piston-engine design from 1944, was outdated, too, and its performance was regarded as inadequate for the Fifties. This led to a major development initiative for modern jet aircraft for the Flygvapnet in 1946, which spawned the Saab 29 ‘Tunnan’ fighter and the Saab B31 light bomber. Both aircraft were initially designed around the de Havilland Goblin turbojet of British origin, but when the more powerful de Havilland Ghost became available, this was chosen as the standard powerplant. Both aircraft incorporated such modern features as swept wings or ejection seats.
The Saab B31 was originally developed as a straightforward tactical bomber replacement for the Saab 18, called the Saab B31, which would carry its free-fall ordnance internally in a bomb bay. The Saab B31 had a streamlined, drop-shaped fuselage. A crew of two were envisioned, the pilot and a navigator/bomb aimer. They would sit in separate cabins, a generously glazed nose section with an optical bombsight and a navigational/bomb aiming radar in a shallow blister underneath, and in a fighter-type cockpit on top of the hull, respectively. Swept wings were planned that would offer a good compromise between speed benefits and range/lift. Due to the aircraft’s size and weight, two de Havilland Ghost engines were required, but integrating these bulky centrifugal flow engines with a relatively large diameter turned out to be a design challenge.
Several layouts were evaluated, including engines buried in the rear fuselage with side air intakes, or engines mounted in wing root fairings with individual exhausts at the wings’ trailing edge. Eventually the Saab B31’s powerplants were directly mounted in nacelles under slightly swept (20°) shoulder wings, what made access and maintenance easy and kept the fuselage free for a huge fuel capacity, a generous bomb bay, and a conventional tricycle main landing gear. The latter’s tread width was quite narrow, though, which might have caused handling problems, so that during the bomber’s design refinements the landing gear arrangement was radically changed into a tandem layout. It eventually comprised of two main struts featuring large low-pressure twin wheels, supported by small outrigger wheels that semi-retracted into fairings under the bulbous engine nacelles. While unusual, this arrangement had the side benefit that the bomb bay could be lengthened and the fuel capacity in the fuselage could be increased without a center of gravity shift, with the rear/main landing gear strut well placed further aft, well behind the aircraft’s center of gravity. This, however, prevented normal rotation upon take-off, so that the front strut was lengthened to provide the aircraft with an imminent positive angle of attack while rolling, giving the Saab B31 a distinctive nose-up stance on the ground.
The enlarged bomb bay could hold up to four free-fall 340 kg bombs, the B31’s primary weapon. Additional ordinance, typically two further single bombs of up to 500 kg caliber, pods with unguided missiles, or drop tanks to extend range, could be carried on a pair of hard points outside of the engine nacelles. The maximum total payload was 2.400 kg. No offensive or defensive guns were carried, the B31 was supposed to rely only on speed and agility. Large air brakes on the aircraft’s flanks were introduced to prevent the exceeding of the B31’s design speed limit of Mach 0.9 in a dive, and they also helped to slow down the aircraft upon landing. To reduce the landing run length further a brake parachute was housed in an extended teardrop fairing on the fin that also held the swept horizontal stabilizers.
Overall, the Saab B31 reminded vaguely of the Soviet Yak-120/25 (NATO code Flashlight A) and of the French Sud-Ouest SO.4050 Vautour, which were both under development at the same time. Beyond the original tactical bomber role that was supposed to supersede the Swedish B 18, the Saab B31 was also intended to fulfill night/all-weather reconnaissance missions, outfitted with a camera and sensor pallet in the bomb bay and flash bombs on the wing hardpoints. Furthermore, the aircraft was proposed to become, in a second step, the basis for a jet-powered long-range all-weather fighter, a type of aircraft that was direly needed by Flygvapnet during the late Forties. The situation was so severe and urgent that the Swedish Air Force did not want to wait for a J31 development and had to procure sixty radar-equipped de Havilland Mosquito NF.30 night fighters from Great Britain as a hasty stopgap solution – a totally outdated model in the late Forties, but it was the best and only readily available off-the-rack solution.
In parallel, both engine and aircraft technology underwent dramatic developments and literally made leaps: In December 1948, an initial contract for the design and mockup of Saab's newly proposed P.1150 design was issued, a modern swept-wing design that already represented the next, transonic fighter aircraft generation. The resulting aircraft would become the Saab 32 ‘Lansen’ and it literally overtook the B31’s intended role as the Saab 18 bomber and attack aircraft replacement. However, a modern all-weather fighter with long range and a powerful radar was still not on the horizon, and, consequently, the Saab B31’s original bomber/reconnaissance version was dropped completely in favor of an optimized interceptor derivative with a powerful on-board radar: the J31. This was, however, also just a stopgap solution until an all-weather fighter version of the favored Saab 32 would be ready for service, so that a single aircraft type would take over multiple military roles and therewith simplify production, maintenance and logistics.
From that point on the Saab B31 was re-designed and optimized for a principal fighter role, with an attack capability as a secondary capability. However, due to its bomber origins and its intended mission profile the J31 was not intended to be a typical sleek and nimble dogfighter (that was the contemporary Saab 29’s role as a day fighter, even though a radar-equipped version of the Tunnan was on Saab’s drawing boards, too, yet not realized because compact systems were not available), but rather as a standoff night fighter which would loiter on station and patrol the air space, search for targets and then identify and engage them.
The bomber’s large air brakes were a welcome feature to position the approaching fighter behind a potential slower target, which were primarily relatively cumbersome bombers that would come in at medium to high altitude and at subsonic speed. This mission profile heavily influenced the J31 design and also set boundaries that were later hard to overcome and develop the aircraft’s potential further. While the light bomber basis would meet the required demands concerning range, speed and limited agility, the obligatory radar and its periphery to fulfill the N/AW fighter mission led to a major re-design of the forward fuselage. A large radar dish under a solid nose radome now occupied the formerly glazed nose section, and the radar operator was placed together with the pilot in a new pressurized side-by-side cockpit under a common canopy. A large and relatively flat forward windshield was used; while not conducive to high-speed flight, it provided distortion-free external visibility, something that was particularly valued for a night fighter at that time. Both pilot and navigator/radar operator had full steering equipment, what also made a dedicated trainer version unnecessary. Both sticks were extendable so that more force could be exerted upon it by the pilot as a fallback measure in the event of a hydraulic failure. Bleed air from the engines was used to de-ice the wings’ and tail surfaces’ leading edges and the engines’ air intakes, so that the aircraft could operate even in harsh climatic conditions.
Radar and fire control system for the J31 were created and produced by Ericsson and called “Gryning” (= Dawn). The system was quite advanced for the time even though complex: a combination of three different radars, each performing separate functions. The system comprised a search radar, a tracking radar, both located in the nose under a huge mutual radome, and a tail warning radar with a separate, smaller antenna. The search radar covered the front hemisphere and could detect aircraft at distances up to 35 kilometres (about 20 miles) away while the tracking radar could achieve a weapons lock up to 4 km (2.5 miles) away. Additionally, the Gryning system had a limited look-down capability, being able to detect aircraft that flew underneath the J31 at an altitude of down to 800 m (2.600 ft). The tail-mounted surveillance radar was effective up to 15 km (almost 10 miles) away. The complexity of this vacuum tube-based radar system, produced before the advent of semiconductor electronics, required a lot of internal space and intensive maintenance to keep it operating properly – and it would have been much too big or heavy to fit into the more modern but also more slender Saab 32 airframe.
The armament was changed, too. While the B31 bomber was intended to carry no guns at all the fighter derivative was now armed with four 20 mm cannon in the lower nose, plus two retractable unguided air-to-air missile racks in the former bomb bay in tandem, carrying a total of 96 projectiles, which were supposed to be fired singly, short bursts or in one or more massive salvoes against bomber formations, covering a huge field of fire and ensuring a takedown even with a single hit. This core armament was complemented by a pair of underwing hardpoints outside of the engine nacelles which could carry pods with further 18 unguided missiles each, iron bombs of up to 500 kg calibre for a secondary attack capability, or 570 l drop tanks to extend the J31’s range and loiter time.
An initial order for three prototypes was placed by the Swedish government, and on 16 October 1950, the first J31, even though still lacking the radar, conducted its maiden flight. The flight test program proceeded relatively smoothly, but the performance was rather poor for a fighter. More powerful engines were required, but choices for Saab were very limited. The use of the Saab 29’s indigenous afterburner variant of the Ghost (which was by then license-produced in Sweden as the Svenska Flygmotor RM2) was deemed inefficient for the large aircraft, so that attempts were made to improve the Ghost’s dry thrust for the J31 without an increased fuel consumption through reheat. This new indigenous engine variant became the RM2F (“förstärkt” = “powered-up”), which provided 5,400 lbf (24.02 kN) of thrust with water-alcohol injection instead of the RM2’s original dry 5,000 lbf (22 kN) maximum thrust. The tank for the required water-alcohol mixture was carried in the rear half of the former bomb bay and replaced one of the unguided missile racks. These were hardly ever used operationally, though, and soon completely removed, replaced by a second water-alcohol tank, which gave the aircraft enough endurance of 30 minutes at the increased thrust output level.
A follow-on order for six pre-production aircraft was soon received, which were still equipped with the weaker original RM2 and designated J31A. These machines were delivered to F 1 Västmanland Flygflottilj at Hässlö air base in Central Sweden, which just had been converted from a bomber to a night fighter unit, having been equipped with the J 30 Mosquitos. There the J31 was evaluated against the J30 until early 1951 and deemed superior in almost every aspect. With these satisfactory results, a full production order for 54 more aircraft was placed in mid-1951. These machines were now outfitted with more powerful RM2F engines and other refinements and designated J31B. This became the type’s operational main variant. All were delivered to F 1 where they were exclusively operated and gradually replaced the J 30s. In service the J31 received the unofficial nickname “Val” (= Whale), due to its bulky yet streamlined shape, but it was officially never adopted.
During regular maintenance in the following two years, the six early J31As received the stronger RM2F, together with the second water-alcohol tank as well as some avionics updates and were accordingly re-designated J31Bs. Further updates included wipers for the windscreen (a serious issue esp. at slow speed and while taxiing) and two smaller brake parachutes instead of the single large original one.
All J31s were delivered in a natural metal finish and retained it throughout their career; only two machines ever received camouflage during trials, but this measure was deemed unnecessary for the aircraft due to their role. Some aircraft of F 1’s 3rd squadron and operated by the unit’s staff flight had the aircrafts’ fins painted in dark green, though, to improve the contrast to the tactical code letters’ colour, yellow or white, respectively. The J31s’ radomes were made from fiberglass and originally tinted in opaque black. During maintenance and after damage, however, some machines received newly produced replacement fairings which were untinted/semi-transparent.
The only major update the J31B received was rolled out starting in 1958, when the IR-guided Rb24 (AIM-9B Sidewinder AAM) was introduced in the Swedish Air Force. Together with the J29 Tunnan fighters the J31s were outfitted to carry launch rails on the wing hardpoints – even though only a single pair could be carried in total. This, however, markedly improved the type’s combat efficiency, and it would take until the Saab 35F in 1965 with its Rb27/28 Falcon missiles to introduce more capable guided anti-aircraft missiles. Since the Rb24s extended the J31’s weapon range considerably, a potential gun upgrade with 30 mm cannons was not executed and Saab’s resources rather allocated into the Saab 32’s development.
Even though the J31B was a capable night and all-weather fighter for its time, it was limited due to its outdated weaponry and quickly superseded by advancing radar, engine and aerodynamic technologies. It did its job but lacked development and performance potential – and it was a large and complicated aircraft that required lots of maintenance. However, the J31 turned out to be a very stable and robust weapon platform, and it was quite popular among the crews because of the spacious cockpit, even though the field of view on the ground was very limited, due to the tall landing gear front leg, and several J31s were involved in taxiing accidents. Due to its twin engines and radar intercept operator, pilots gained more confidence on long missions in the remote northern areas of. Sweden, esp. on mission over open water.
When the Saab 32’s fighter version, the J 32B, eventually became operational in 1958, it was clear that the heavy and highly limited twin-engine J31B would not remain in service for much longer. By 1963 all machines had been retired from frontline service, initially stored in reserve but scrapped by 1970. Two machines remained operational, though: as flying test beds for the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen (FC) at Malmen AB, where they served until 1981 – primarily to test radar and missile guidance systems, and as radar targets for war games and anti-aircraft unit trainings.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 15,76 m (51 ft 7 1/2 in)
Wingspan: 16.96 m (55 ft 2/3 in)
Height: 4,21 m (13 ft 9 1/2 in)
Wing area: 45 m2 (480 sq ft)
Empty weight: 9,000 kg (19,823 lb)
Gross weight: 17,500 kg (38,546 lb)
….Max takeoff weight: 19,000 kg (41,850 lb)
Fuel capacity: 5,100 L (1,350 US gal / 1,120 imp gal) maximum internal fuel
plus 2x 570 L (150 US gal, 120 imp gal) optional drop-tanks
Powerplant:
2× Svenska Flygmotor RM2F centrifugal-flow turbojet engine (Rolls Royce Ghost), each with
4,750 lbf (21.1 kN) dry thrust at 10,250 rpm and
5,400 lbf (24.02 kN) with temporary water-alcohol injection
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,090 km/h (677 mph, 588 kn; Mach 0.9) at 10,000 ft (3,000 m)
Cruise speed: 732 km/h (455 mph, 395 kn)
Stall speed: 150 km/h (92.8 mph, 80.6 kn) with approach power
Combat range: 1.850 km (1,145 mi, 995 nmi) on internals
Ferry range: 2.200 km (1,375 mi, 1,195 nmi) with 2× 570 l drop-tanks
Service ceiling: 16,200 m (53,062 ft)
Rate of climb: 40 m/s (7.681 ft/min)
Wing loading: 87.1 lb/sq ft (388 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.32
Armament:
4× 20 mm (0.79 in) akan m/47C (license produced Hispano Mark V) autocannon with 220 RPG
48× 75 mm (3.0 in) srak m/55 (Bofors 75 mm (3.0 in) rocket "Frida") unguided air-to-air missiles
with contact fuze high-capacity warhead on retractable rack in ventral bay
(not used operationally, later completely deleted in favor of a second water-alcohol tank)
2× wet underwing hardpoints outside of the engine nacelles for 600 kg (1.321 lb) each;
alternatively a pair of Rb24 (AIM9-B Sidewinder) IR-guided air-to-air missiles
The model and its assembly:
While it does not look spectacular, the J31 (actually my second use of this designation for a Swedish Fifties all-weather fighter, the first was an A.W. Meteor NF.14, but the “31” was lent from the Spitfire PR.XIX in Swedish service as S31) was a major creation feat. It all started with a discussion with fellow Swedish board member Pellson at whatifmodellers.com about Saab prototypes, esp. the early designs. That made me wonder about a twin-jet engine aircraft, something that could replace the Saab 18 bombers much like the BAC Canberra with the RAF’s Mosquito – and looking at similar international projects of the time like the Soviet Il-29 and Yak-25 as well as the French S.O. 4050 Vautour I thought that something similar could work well for Sweden, too.
My concept started with a primary light bomber and attack role, much like the B18 and the Canberra, with the outlook to develop a radar-bearing all-weather fighter from it, which was direly needed in Sweden in the Mid-Fifties and led to the procurement of two interim types in real life, the J30 (Mosquito night fighter) and the J33 (Venom night fighter), while plans were made to equip the J29 with a radar and the Saab 32 already on the drawing boards, even though the latter’s fighter version would be delayed well into the Sixties.
The core of the build was a leftover fuselage from a Matchbox F3D Skyknight – from an incomplete kit that came OOB with one of its three sprue trees double (even though in different colours!). The canopy was also still there, and now I eventually found a good use for it. However, not much more would be taken over from the Skyknight, because the overall layout would be much different, dictated by the bulky centrifugal flow engines that were (only) available to Sweden in the late Forties and which also powered the successful J29 Tunnan. The engines could, due to their diameter and the need for ducts, not be buried in the fuselage, so that they would go under the wings, directly attached to them as in the Il-29 and Vautour. The wings would be slightly swept (around 20°), as a compromise between modernism (as on the J29) and good range/endurance, and shoulder-mounted for good ground clearance and to avoid FOP (an issue of the Yak-25).
Since the engine pods should not be too large and bulky I decided that the main wheels would not retract into them (à la Il-28) and rather follow the Vautour route: with a tandem arrangement retracting into the fuselage and with small outrigger wheels. This had, for the original bomber version, the benefit, that the internal bomb bay could become longer than with a more conventional tricycle landing gear arrangement that would full retract into the hull, much like the Douglas A3D/B.66, with a wider track. And it would look more exotic, too.
With this concept I started a donor parts safari and started work on the fuselage. First major feat was to clean the F3D’s flanks from its original engine fairings – thankfully the Matchbox kit provides them as separate parts, so omitting them was simple, but there were enough major recesses and areas beyond the F3D’s basically teardrop shape hull that had to be filled and PSRed, including the original wing attachment points in the hull’s middle.
Another issue was the cockpit, which was missing through the double sprues. I was lucky to find an original Matchbox F3D tub in the spare box, from my first Skyknight build ever in the late Eighties (then built as a Vietnam era EF-10). New seats were procured as well as two (ugly) pilot figures and a dashboard from an Italeri Tornado IDS. However, the cockpit would later cause some more trouble…
The nose was generously filled with steel balls to keep it down (you never know…), and once the hull was closed, I implanted a new rear landing gear well. In the meantime, I kept searching for engine nacelle and wing parts – both turned out to be challenging. Not that I had not enough material to choose from, but I wanted to make the parts to be as authentic as possible – the nacelles conveying a centrifugal engine inside (see the Gloster Meteor for reference), and the light wing sweep angle as well as the desire for a not-too-modern look made the wing choice really hard.
The nacelles were completed first. I remembered some leftover parts from a Matchbox Meteor night fighter, mainly the intakes, which would be perfect. But the rest of the nacelles took a while to materialize. Eventually I found engine pods from a Hobbycraft Su-25, which are separate pieces. They had a more or less square diameter shape, but their size was good and so I combined them with the round (and bigger!) Meteor NF.14 intakes, after having added trimmed-down intake cones from a Trumpeter Il-28 inside, and PSRing the different shapes into something …more natural. Even though outrigger wheels would later be added I omitted eventual wells at this point, because I had to define the stance through the tandem main wheels first, and this was still tbd.
The wing donors became a lengthy affair. At one point I became so desperate that I tried to use the wing tips from a VEB Plasticart 1:100 Tu-20/95 bomber, but that failed (thankfully!) because the parts turned out to be warped and simply too ugly for the build. I did not find any suitable material in The Stash™, tested wings from an A-6 and an F-14, nothing worked well. I eventually procured – in a forlorn move – a vintage Revell 1:113 B-47 kit. Horrible thing, but its outer wings were useful, even though they required massive modifications. Their roots were cut away to reduce span and their angle was set at about 20°; the slender tips were also cut off, resulting in an almost trapezoid shape with a slightly extended wing chord at the trailing edge of the roots. Lots of PSR was required to improve the surface and to fill some gaps from the OOB engine pod attachment points of the B-47. Ugh.
At that point I had also already found a good fin: from an Academy/Minicraft 1:144 B-1B bomber! This not only offered a very Fifties-esque round and swept shape, it also had suitable attachment points for the stabilizers for a cruciform tail, which appeared necessary due to the engines’ wing position. As a side benefit, I could use the B-47’s wing tips as stabilizers, even though they had to be PSRed a lot, too.
To attach the new wings to the F3D fuselage I made cutouts at shoulder height, but the engine pods were first mounted and PSRed under the wings. More putty and sanding mess, but it was worthwhile.
In the meantime I worked on the landing gear and used parts from the ugly VEB Plasticart Tu-20/95 to scratch a tandem layout with twin wheels and a significant nose-up stance (due to the rear wheels’ position beyond the aircraft’s centre of gravity). Once this was settled and the wings in place I could work on the outrigger wheels. These were procured from a Matchbox 1:72 Sea Harrier and mounted in scratched fairings under the engine pods, so that they could semi-retract. With the ground clearance defined by the main wheels a suitable position and length for the outriggers could be found, and in the end the J31 has a proper stance with all four legs on the ground.
Painting and markings:
I like to apply simple liveries to weird builds, and for the J31 I settled upon a NMF finish – which was typical for the contemporary J29 Tunnan fighters, too. Only the reconnaissance versions as well as the fighters of as single operational unit were ever camouflaged (in dark green and dark blue). The only other realistic cammo option would have been the standard Swedish uniform dark green over blue grey. But bare metal appeared IMHO much better suited.
As a non-standard measure the model received an overall thin coat of grey primer, primarily to identify dents and notches on its many PSRed surface areas – a good move, because a lot of small flaws could be identified and treated before a final overall coat with “White Aluminium” from a rattle can (Duplicolor, RAL 9006) was applied and details like the radome, antennae (both in black) and the landing gear and its wells (in a light bronze tone, seen on Saab 29s and 32s) were painted in detail. I think the silver underlines the J31’s clean lines well?
The model received a light black ink washing, less for true weathering but to emphasize engraved details and for a “cloudier” look of the NMF surfaces. This was further enhanced through a careful treatment with grinded graphite (which adds a truly metallic shine to the paint), and since a lot of surface details were lost through PSR I did some manual panel-shading with different silver tones and re-created panel lines all over the hull with a soft pencil, mostly free-handedly. Quite simple, but it improves the overall impression a lot.
Decals were puzzled together. The Swedish roundels came from a generic TL-Modellbau sheet, the “T” on the tail was scratched from generic white and blue stripes from the same manufacturer. The blue band around the nose was made with the same material, plus a white “T” – inspired by tactical markings from some J29s from the Fifties. Some stencils were collected from the scrap box, and black walkway borders added to the wings’ upper surfaces and the spine behind the cockpit. As a side benefit these hide some lingering inconsistencies on the wing surfaces well.
Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (Italeri) for a shiny finish, except for the radomes, which became matt.
It might not look spectacular or exciting, but I am quite proud of this “second” J31, because it not only was a major kitbashing project, it also conveys the Fifties “look and feel” I wanted to catch, like its contemporaries S.O. 4050 Vautour, Yak-25, or even the stillborn Baade Ba-152 airliner. From that point it turned out very well, and going for a simple NMF livery was IMHO also a good move – the J31 has a certain “space age” look? At least, this is what you can get when you combine major parts from F3D, B-47. B1, Il-28, Su-25, Tu-95 and a Gloster Meteor… 😉
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The SAAB B31 was a Swedish jet-powered multirole aircraft, originally designed to serve as a tactical bomber, ground attack, reconnaissance and interceptor aircraft. In the aftermath of the Second World War, Sweden set about the rebuilding and modernization of its armed forces. Regarding aviation, jet propulsion had been identified as the powerplant of the future, and experience with the SAAB 21R, which had been converted from a propeller-pusher aircraft into a jet-powered fighter and attack aircraft in 1947, bolstered confidence in the home industry’s competence. The Saab 21R was only an interim solution, though. One hundred and twenty-four aircraft were planned but this number was reduced to only 64 and they were mainly used as fighter-bombers. The Flygvapnet’s standard post-war bomber, the Saab 18, a twin piston-engine design from 1944, was outdated, too, and its performance was regarded as inadequate for the Fifties. This led to a major development initiative for modern jet aircraft for the Flygvapnet in 1946, which spawned the Saab 29 ‘Tunnan’ fighter and the Saab B31 light bomber. Both aircraft were initially designed around the de Havilland Goblin turbojet of British origin, but when the more powerful de Havilland Ghost became available, this was chosen as the standard powerplant. Both aircraft incorporated such modern features as swept wings or ejection seats.
The Saab B31 was originally developed as a straightforward tactical bomber replacement for the Saab 18, called the Saab B31, which would carry its free-fall ordnance internally in a bomb bay. The Saab B31 had a streamlined, drop-shaped fuselage. A crew of two were envisioned, the pilot and a navigator/bomb aimer. They would sit in separate cabins, a generously glazed nose section with an optical bombsight and a navigational/bomb aiming radar in a shallow blister underneath, and in a fighter-type cockpit on top of the hull, respectively. Swept wings were planned that would offer a good compromise between speed benefits and range/lift. Due to the aircraft’s size and weight, two de Havilland Ghost engines were required, but integrating these bulky centrifugal flow engines with a relatively large diameter turned out to be a design challenge.
Several layouts were evaluated, including engines buried in the rear fuselage with side air intakes, or engines mounted in wing root fairings with individual exhausts at the wings’ trailing edge. Eventually the Saab B31’s powerplants were directly mounted in nacelles under slightly swept (20°) shoulder wings, what made access and maintenance easy and kept the fuselage free for a huge fuel capacity, a generous bomb bay, and a conventional tricycle main landing gear. The latter’s tread width was quite narrow, though, which might have caused handling problems, so that during the bomber’s design refinements the landing gear arrangement was radically changed into a tandem layout. It eventually comprised of two main struts featuring large low-pressure twin wheels, supported by small outrigger wheels that semi-retracted into fairings under the bulbous engine nacelles. While unusual, this arrangement had the side benefit that the bomb bay could be lengthened and the fuel capacity in the fuselage could be increased without a center of gravity shift, with the rear/main landing gear strut well placed further aft, well behind the aircraft’s center of gravity. This, however, prevented normal rotation upon take-off, so that the front strut was lengthened to provide the aircraft with an imminent positive angle of attack while rolling, giving the Saab B31 a distinctive nose-up stance on the ground.
The enlarged bomb bay could hold up to four free-fall 340 kg bombs, the B31’s primary weapon. Additional ordinance, typically two further single bombs of up to 500 kg caliber, pods with unguided missiles, or drop tanks to extend range, could be carried on a pair of hard points outside of the engine nacelles. The maximum total payload was 2.400 kg. No offensive or defensive guns were carried, the B31 was supposed to rely only on speed and agility. Large air brakes on the aircraft’s flanks were introduced to prevent the exceeding of the B31’s design speed limit of Mach 0.9 in a dive, and they also helped to slow down the aircraft upon landing. To reduce the landing run length further a brake parachute was housed in an extended teardrop fairing on the fin that also held the swept horizontal stabilizers.
Overall, the Saab B31 reminded vaguely of the Soviet Yak-120/25 (NATO code Flashlight A) and of the French Sud-Ouest SO.4050 Vautour, which were both under development at the same time. Beyond the original tactical bomber role that was supposed to supersede the Swedish B 18, the Saab B31 was also intended to fulfill night/all-weather reconnaissance missions, outfitted with a camera and sensor pallet in the bomb bay and flash bombs on the wing hardpoints. Furthermore, the aircraft was proposed to become, in a second step, the basis for a jet-powered long-range all-weather fighter, a type of aircraft that was direly needed by Flygvapnet during the late Forties. The situation was so severe and urgent that the Swedish Air Force did not want to wait for a J31 development and had to procure sixty radar-equipped de Havilland Mosquito NF.30 night fighters from Great Britain as a hasty stopgap solution – a totally outdated model in the late Forties, but it was the best and only readily available off-the-rack solution.
In parallel, both engine and aircraft technology underwent dramatic developments and literally made leaps: In December 1948, an initial contract for the design and mockup of Saab's newly proposed P.1150 design was issued, a modern swept-wing design that already represented the next, transonic fighter aircraft generation. The resulting aircraft would become the Saab 32 ‘Lansen’ and it literally overtook the B31’s intended role as the Saab 18 bomber and attack aircraft replacement. However, a modern all-weather fighter with long range and a powerful radar was still not on the horizon, and, consequently, the Saab B31’s original bomber/reconnaissance version was dropped completely in favor of an optimized interceptor derivative with a powerful on-board radar: the J31. This was, however, also just a stopgap solution until an all-weather fighter version of the favored Saab 32 would be ready for service, so that a single aircraft type would take over multiple military roles and therewith simplify production, maintenance and logistics.
From that point on the Saab B31 was re-designed and optimized for a principal fighter role, with an attack capability as a secondary capability. However, due to its bomber origins and its intended mission profile the J31 was not intended to be a typical sleek and nimble dogfighter (that was the contemporary Saab 29’s role as a day fighter, even though a radar-equipped version of the Tunnan was on Saab’s drawing boards, too, yet not realized because compact systems were not available), but rather as a standoff night fighter which would loiter on station and patrol the air space, search for targets and then identify and engage them.
The bomber’s large air brakes were a welcome feature to position the approaching fighter behind a potential slower target, which were primarily relatively cumbersome bombers that would come in at medium to high altitude and at subsonic speed. This mission profile heavily influenced the J31 design and also set boundaries that were later hard to overcome and develop the aircraft’s potential further. While the light bomber basis would meet the required demands concerning range, speed and limited agility, the obligatory radar and its periphery to fulfill the N/AW fighter mission led to a major re-design of the forward fuselage. A large radar dish under a solid nose radome now occupied the formerly glazed nose section, and the radar operator was placed together with the pilot in a new pressurized side-by-side cockpit under a common canopy. A large and relatively flat forward windshield was used; while not conducive to high-speed flight, it provided distortion-free external visibility, something that was particularly valued for a night fighter at that time. Both pilot and navigator/radar operator had full steering equipment, what also made a dedicated trainer version unnecessary. Both sticks were extendable so that more force could be exerted upon it by the pilot as a fallback measure in the event of a hydraulic failure. Bleed air from the engines was used to de-ice the wings’ and tail surfaces’ leading edges and the engines’ air intakes, so that the aircraft could operate even in harsh climatic conditions.
Radar and fire control system for the J31 were created and produced by Ericsson and called “Gryning” (= Dawn). The system was quite advanced for the time even though complex: a combination of three different radars, each performing separate functions. The system comprised a search radar, a tracking radar, both located in the nose under a huge mutual radome, and a tail warning radar with a separate, smaller antenna. The search radar covered the front hemisphere and could detect aircraft at distances up to 35 kilometres (about 20 miles) away while the tracking radar could achieve a weapons lock up to 4 km (2.5 miles) away. Additionally, the Gryning system had a limited look-down capability, being able to detect aircraft that flew underneath the J31 at an altitude of down to 800 m (2.600 ft). The tail-mounted surveillance radar was effective up to 15 km (almost 10 miles) away. The complexity of this vacuum tube-based radar system, produced before the advent of semiconductor electronics, required a lot of internal space and intensive maintenance to keep it operating properly – and it would have been much too big or heavy to fit into the more modern but also more slender Saab 32 airframe.
The armament was changed, too. While the B31 bomber was intended to carry no guns at all the fighter derivative was now armed with four 20 mm cannon in the lower nose, plus two retractable unguided air-to-air missile racks in the former bomb bay in tandem, carrying a total of 96 projectiles, which were supposed to be fired singly, short bursts or in one or more massive salvoes against bomber formations, covering a huge field of fire and ensuring a takedown even with a single hit. This core armament was complemented by a pair of underwing hardpoints outside of the engine nacelles which could carry pods with further 18 unguided missiles each, iron bombs of up to 500 kg calibre for a secondary attack capability, or 570 l drop tanks to extend the J31’s range and loiter time.
An initial order for three prototypes was placed by the Swedish government, and on 16 October 1950, the first J31, even though still lacking the radar, conducted its maiden flight. The flight test program proceeded relatively smoothly, but the performance was rather poor for a fighter. More powerful engines were required, but choices for Saab were very limited. The use of the Saab 29’s indigenous afterburner variant of the Ghost (which was by then license-produced in Sweden as the Svenska Flygmotor RM2) was deemed inefficient for the large aircraft, so that attempts were made to improve the Ghost’s dry thrust for the J31 without an increased fuel consumption through reheat. This new indigenous engine variant became the RM2F (“förstärkt” = “powered-up”), which provided 5,400 lbf (24.02 kN) of thrust with water-alcohol injection instead of the RM2’s original dry 5,000 lbf (22 kN) maximum thrust. The tank for the required water-alcohol mixture was carried in the rear half of the former bomb bay and replaced one of the unguided missile racks. These were hardly ever used operationally, though, and soon completely removed, replaced by a second water-alcohol tank, which gave the aircraft enough endurance of 30 minutes at the increased thrust output level.
A follow-on order for six pre-production aircraft was soon received, which were still equipped with the weaker original RM2 and designated J31A. These machines were delivered to F 1 Västmanland Flygflottilj at Hässlö air base in Central Sweden, which just had been converted from a bomber to a night fighter unit, having been equipped with the J 30 Mosquitos. There the J31 was evaluated against the J30 until early 1951 and deemed superior in almost every aspect. With these satisfactory results, a full production order for 54 more aircraft was placed in mid-1951. These machines were now outfitted with more powerful RM2F engines and other refinements and designated J31B. This became the type’s operational main variant. All were delivered to F 1 where they were exclusively operated and gradually replaced the J 30s. In service the J31 received the unofficial nickname “Val” (= Whale), due to its bulky yet streamlined shape, but it was officially never adopted.
During regular maintenance in the following two years, the six early J31As received the stronger RM2F, together with the second water-alcohol tank as well as some avionics updates and were accordingly re-designated J31Bs. Further updates included wipers for the windscreen (a serious issue esp. at slow speed and while taxiing) and two smaller brake parachutes instead of the single large original one.
All J31s were delivered in a natural metal finish and retained it throughout their career; only two machines ever received camouflage during trials, but this measure was deemed unnecessary for the aircraft due to their role. Some aircraft of F 1’s 3rd squadron and operated by the unit’s staff flight had the aircrafts’ fins painted in dark green, though, to improve the contrast to the tactical code letters’ colour, yellow or white, respectively. The J31s’ radomes were made from fiberglass and originally tinted in opaque black. During maintenance and after damage, however, some machines received newly produced replacement fairings which were untinted/semi-transparent.
The only major update the J31B received was rolled out starting in 1958, when the IR-guided Rb24 (AIM-9B Sidewinder AAM) was introduced in the Swedish Air Force. Together with the J29 Tunnan fighters the J31s were outfitted to carry launch rails on the wing hardpoints – even though only a single pair could be carried in total. This, however, markedly improved the type’s combat efficiency, and it would take until the Saab 35F in 1965 with its Rb27/28 Falcon missiles to introduce more capable guided anti-aircraft missiles. Since the Rb24s extended the J31’s weapon range considerably, a potential gun upgrade with 30 mm cannons was not executed and Saab’s resources rather allocated into the Saab 32’s development.
Even though the J31B was a capable night and all-weather fighter for its time, it was limited due to its outdated weaponry and quickly superseded by advancing radar, engine and aerodynamic technologies. It did its job but lacked development and performance potential – and it was a large and complicated aircraft that required lots of maintenance. However, the J31 turned out to be a very stable and robust weapon platform, and it was quite popular among the crews because of the spacious cockpit, even though the field of view on the ground was very limited, due to the tall landing gear front leg, and several J31s were involved in taxiing accidents. Due to its twin engines and radar intercept operator, pilots gained more confidence on long missions in the remote northern areas of. Sweden, esp. on mission over open water.
When the Saab 32’s fighter version, the J 32B, eventually became operational in 1958, it was clear that the heavy and highly limited twin-engine J31B would not remain in service for much longer. By 1963 all machines had been retired from frontline service, initially stored in reserve but scrapped by 1970. Two machines remained operational, though: as flying test beds for the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen (FC) at Malmen AB, where they served until 1981 – primarily to test radar and missile guidance systems, and as radar targets for war games and anti-aircraft unit trainings.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 15,76 m (51 ft 7 1/2 in)
Wingspan: 16.96 m (55 ft 2/3 in)
Height: 4,21 m (13 ft 9 1/2 in)
Wing area: 45 m2 (480 sq ft)
Empty weight: 9,000 kg (19,823 lb)
Gross weight: 17,500 kg (38,546 lb)
….Max takeoff weight: 19,000 kg (41,850 lb)
Fuel capacity: 5,100 L (1,350 US gal / 1,120 imp gal) maximum internal fuel
plus 2x 570 L (150 US gal, 120 imp gal) optional drop-tanks
Powerplant:
2× Svenska Flygmotor RM2F centrifugal-flow turbojet engine (Rolls Royce Ghost), each with
4,750 lbf (21.1 kN) dry thrust at 10,250 rpm and
5,400 lbf (24.02 kN) with temporary water-alcohol injection
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,090 km/h (677 mph, 588 kn; Mach 0.9) at 10,000 ft (3,000 m)
Cruise speed: 732 km/h (455 mph, 395 kn)
Stall speed: 150 km/h (92.8 mph, 80.6 kn) with approach power
Combat range: 1.850 km (1,145 mi, 995 nmi) on internals
Ferry range: 2.200 km (1,375 mi, 1,195 nmi) with 2× 570 l drop-tanks
Service ceiling: 16,200 m (53,062 ft)
Rate of climb: 40 m/s (7.681 ft/min)
Wing loading: 87.1 lb/sq ft (388 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.32
Armament:
4× 20 mm (0.79 in) akan m/47C (license produced Hispano Mark V) autocannon with 220 RPG
48× 75 mm (3.0 in) srak m/55 (Bofors 75 mm (3.0 in) rocket "Frida") unguided air-to-air missiles
with contact fuze high-capacity warhead on retractable rack in ventral bay
(not used operationally, later completely deleted in favor of a second water-alcohol tank)
2× wet underwing hardpoints outside of the engine nacelles for 600 kg (1.321 lb) each;
alternatively a pair of Rb24 (AIM9-B Sidewinder) IR-guided air-to-air missiles
The model and its assembly:
While it does not look spectacular, the J31 (actually my second use of this designation for a Swedish Fifties all-weather fighter, the first was an A.W. Meteor NF.14, but the “31” was lent from the Spitfire PR.XIX in Swedish service as S31) was a major creation feat. It all started with a discussion with fellow Swedish board member Pellson at whatifmodellers.com about Saab prototypes, esp. the early designs. That made me wonder about a twin-jet engine aircraft, something that could replace the Saab 18 bombers much like the BAC Canberra with the RAF’s Mosquito – and looking at similar international projects of the time like the Soviet Il-29 and Yak-25 as well as the French S.O. 4050 Vautour I thought that something similar could work well for Sweden, too.
My concept started with a primary light bomber and attack role, much like the B18 and the Canberra, with the outlook to develop a radar-bearing all-weather fighter from it, which was direly needed in Sweden in the Mid-Fifties and led to the procurement of two interim types in real life, the J30 (Mosquito night fighter) and the J33 (Venom night fighter), while plans were made to equip the J29 with a radar and the Saab 32 already on the drawing boards, even though the latter’s fighter version would be delayed well into the Sixties.
The core of the build was a leftover fuselage from a Matchbox F3D Skyknight – from an incomplete kit that came OOB with one of its three sprue trees double (even though in different colours!). The canopy was also still there, and now I eventually found a good use for it. However, not much more would be taken over from the Skyknight, because the overall layout would be much different, dictated by the bulky centrifugal flow engines that were (only) available to Sweden in the late Forties and which also powered the successful J29 Tunnan. The engines could, due to their diameter and the need for ducts, not be buried in the fuselage, so that they would go under the wings, directly attached to them as in the Il-29 and Vautour. The wings would be slightly swept (around 20°), as a compromise between modernism (as on the J29) and good range/endurance, and shoulder-mounted for good ground clearance and to avoid FOP (an issue of the Yak-25).
Since the engine pods should not be too large and bulky I decided that the main wheels would not retract into them (à la Il-28) and rather follow the Vautour route: with a tandem arrangement retracting into the fuselage and with small outrigger wheels. This had, for the original bomber version, the benefit, that the internal bomb bay could become longer than with a more conventional tricycle landing gear arrangement that would full retract into the hull, much like the Douglas A3D/B.66, with a wider track. And it would look more exotic, too.
With this concept I started a donor parts safari and started work on the fuselage. First major feat was to clean the F3D’s flanks from its original engine fairings – thankfully the Matchbox kit provides them as separate parts, so omitting them was simple, but there were enough major recesses and areas beyond the F3D’s basically teardrop shape hull that had to be filled and PSRed, including the original wing attachment points in the hull’s middle.
Another issue was the cockpit, which was missing through the double sprues. I was lucky to find an original Matchbox F3D tub in the spare box, from my first Skyknight build ever in the late Eighties (then built as a Vietnam era EF-10). New seats were procured as well as two (ugly) pilot figures and a dashboard from an Italeri Tornado IDS. However, the cockpit would later cause some more trouble…
The nose was generously filled with steel balls to keep it down (you never know…), and once the hull was closed, I implanted a new rear landing gear well. In the meantime, I kept searching for engine nacelle and wing parts – both turned out to be challenging. Not that I had not enough material to choose from, but I wanted to make the parts to be as authentic as possible – the nacelles conveying a centrifugal engine inside (see the Gloster Meteor for reference), and the light wing sweep angle as well as the desire for a not-too-modern look made the wing choice really hard.
The nacelles were completed first. I remembered some leftover parts from a Matchbox Meteor night fighter, mainly the intakes, which would be perfect. But the rest of the nacelles took a while to materialize. Eventually I found engine pods from a Hobbycraft Su-25, which are separate pieces. They had a more or less square diameter shape, but their size was good and so I combined them with the round (and bigger!) Meteor NF.14 intakes, after having added trimmed-down intake cones from a Trumpeter Il-28 inside, and PSRing the different shapes into something …more natural. Even though outrigger wheels would later be added I omitted eventual wells at this point, because I had to define the stance through the tandem main wheels first, and this was still tbd.
The wing donors became a lengthy affair. At one point I became so desperate that I tried to use the wing tips from a VEB Plasticart 1:100 Tu-20/95 bomber, but that failed (thankfully!) because the parts turned out to be warped and simply too ugly for the build. I did not find any suitable material in The Stash™, tested wings from an A-6 and an F-14, nothing worked well. I eventually procured – in a forlorn move – a vintage Revell 1:113 B-47 kit. Horrible thing, but its outer wings were useful, even though they required massive modifications. Their roots were cut away to reduce span and their angle was set at about 20°; the slender tips were also cut off, resulting in an almost trapezoid shape with a slightly extended wing chord at the trailing edge of the roots. Lots of PSR was required to improve the surface and to fill some gaps from the OOB engine pod attachment points of the B-47. Ugh.
At that point I had also already found a good fin: from an Academy/Minicraft 1:144 B-1B bomber! This not only offered a very Fifties-esque round and swept shape, it also had suitable attachment points for the stabilizers for a cruciform tail, which appeared necessary due to the engines’ wing position. As a side benefit, I could use the B-47’s wing tips as stabilizers, even though they had to be PSRed a lot, too.
To attach the new wings to the F3D fuselage I made cutouts at shoulder height, but the engine pods were first mounted and PSRed under the wings. More putty and sanding mess, but it was worthwhile.
In the meantime I worked on the landing gear and used parts from the ugly VEB Plasticart Tu-20/95 to scratch a tandem layout with twin wheels and a significant nose-up stance (due to the rear wheels’ position beyond the aircraft’s centre of gravity). Once this was settled and the wings in place I could work on the outrigger wheels. These were procured from a Matchbox 1:72 Sea Harrier and mounted in scratched fairings under the engine pods, so that they could semi-retract. With the ground clearance defined by the main wheels a suitable position and length for the outriggers could be found, and in the end the J31 has a proper stance with all four legs on the ground.
Painting and markings:
I like to apply simple liveries to weird builds, and for the J31 I settled upon a NMF finish – which was typical for the contemporary J29 Tunnan fighters, too. Only the reconnaissance versions as well as the fighters of as single operational unit were ever camouflaged (in dark green and dark blue). The only other realistic cammo option would have been the standard Swedish uniform dark green over blue grey. But bare metal appeared IMHO much better suited.
As a non-standard measure the model received an overall thin coat of grey primer, primarily to identify dents and notches on its many PSRed surface areas – a good move, because a lot of small flaws could be identified and treated before a final overall coat with “White Aluminium” from a rattle can (Duplicolor, RAL 9006) was applied and details like the radome, antennae (both in black) and the landing gear and its wells (in a light bronze tone, seen on Saab 29s and 32s) were painted in detail. I think the silver underlines the J31’s clean lines well?
The model received a light black ink washing, less for true weathering but to emphasize engraved details and for a “cloudier” look of the NMF surfaces. This was further enhanced through a careful treatment with grinded graphite (which adds a truly metallic shine to the paint), and since a lot of surface details were lost through PSR I did some manual panel-shading with different silver tones and re-created panel lines all over the hull with a soft pencil, mostly free-handedly. Quite simple, but it improves the overall impression a lot.
Decals were puzzled together. The Swedish roundels came from a generic TL-Modellbau sheet, the “T” on the tail was scratched from generic white and blue stripes from the same manufacturer. The blue band around the nose was made with the same material, plus a white “T” – inspired by tactical markings from some J29s from the Fifties. Some stencils were collected from the scrap box, and black walkway borders added to the wings’ upper surfaces and the spine behind the cockpit. As a side benefit these hide some lingering inconsistencies on the wing surfaces well.
Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (Italeri) for a shiny finish, except for the radomes, which became matt.
It might not look spectacular or exciting, but I am quite proud of this “second” J31, because it not only was a major kitbashing project, it also conveys the Fifties “look and feel” I wanted to catch, like its contemporaries S.O. 4050 Vautour, Yak-25, or even the stillborn Baade Ba-152 airliner. From that point it turned out very well, and going for a simple NMF livery was IMHO also a good move – the J31 has a certain “space age” look? At least, this is what you can get when you combine major parts from F3D, B-47. B1, Il-28, Su-25, Tu-95 and a Gloster Meteor… 😉
Amirsina Derakhshan and Kevin Jeung of Soignée Catering (French for refinement) cross modern culinary techniques with classic French-Italian to create innovative dishes like the 64-degree egg. 36-hour sous vide Berkshire pork belly, butter grilled brioche toast soldiers and confit tomatoes side the hour-cooked just-set egg. Ruffles of micro sorrel echo lemon vinaigrette dressed frisée which cuts through the richness of the salt-kissed egg and pork; Koslik's triple crunch and charred scallion oil serves to bridge the distinct components. Menus start at $35/per person for a 3-course meal.
Soignée Catering
www.torontolife.com/daily/daily-dish/food-porn/2011/04/20...
The Launch 22v is the perfect combination of size, refinement and performance. This 22.5-foot wakeboard boat welcomes a crew of 15 with room for gear and an interior geared toward luxurious accommodation. Completely redesigned for 2012, the 22V interior brings together intricate sections of multi-textured Syntec Nanoblock vinyls with the durability of exclusive Gore Tenara thread. Triple density foam construction makes the Launch interior as comfortable as it is eye-catching. Supra has made the high-traffic path from the lounge to the swim step worry-free with a newly tooled rear seat step and transom walk-over covered in SeaDeck no-slip padding. The wakes are pro caliber and controllable with cockpit switch or the VISION dash, but the 22V is as much about the drive as it is the ride. Slicing through rough water with flat precise turns, the 22V is exhilarating to drive. The high and slow speed maneuvers are almost as impressive as you will look pulling them off. Available with a walk-through bow as a Sunsport or with the Launch playpen, the 22V captures your water sports boating lifestyle.
Overall Length w/o Platform: 22'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform: 24'6"
Overall Length w/ Platform & Trailer: 26' 4"
Width (Beam): 100"
Overall Width w/ Trailer: 102"
Draft: 25"
Weight - Boat only: 3900 lbs
Weight - Boat and Trailer: 5000 lbs
Capacity - Passenger: 15
Capacity - Weight: 2,100 lbs
Capacity - Fuel: 50 gals
Capacity - Ballast: 1450 lbs
Engine - Electronic Fuel Injection: 330 HP 5.7 L MPI w/ CAT
The department has been building up a library of design related reference books over the last few years. Pupils are encouraged to make use of these books on a regular basis. The photographs here demonstrate the tremendous wealth of content contained therein.
The sequence has been shot in such a way that the cover of the book is shown first and a few sample pages are included to give the student an idea of the content the book contains. Pupils may then approach staff and request a short term loan.
Alex had a unique approach to the production of his design folio work. Alex was constantly drawing. He spent most of his classtime just drawing, even when he was supposed to be doing something else. He needed to draw to think. So what you see here isn't necessarily pretty but this folio is stuffed with ideas. Alex's approach demonstrates precisely and accurately the method of idea generation and refinement promoted by the department. Note the large number of drawings on eachpage. this allows the student to easily cross reference and tag from one idea to the next. Extensive annotation also helps to reveal design thinking and comments should always be relevant and refer back to the specification. It is clear that Alex has a thorough understanding of the more technical aspects of the course and he repeatedly suggests ways in which his concepts might be made.
Alex went on to do very well at Higher Product Design. Some of his work also features on this site. He's now studying maths at Warwick University.
The New Nissan 370Z NISMO
SMADEMEDIA.COM - Before the GT-R, LFA, 2000GT', Supa; There was the original Z known then as the Nissan Fairlady Z, Datsun 240Z, Datsun 260Z, Datsun 280Z. the 240Z, It was the car that launch Japaneses performance.
Today we have the newly refresh 370Z NISMO a bad ass car that was updated with inspiration from another bad ass car the GT-R better known as Godzilla. The new 370Z NISMO model features exterior, interior and performance refinements.
2015 370Z NISMO is powered by 350-horsepower 3.7-liter DOHC V6 engine with Variable Valve Event and Lift Control (VVEL) with 276 ib-ft of Torque The engine is matched with an exclusive, tuned H-configured exhaust system design, muffler tuning and an optimized calibration is installed to help create 18 horsepower more than a standard 370Z Coupe.
READ FULL ARTICLE ON SMADEMEDIA.COM - bit.ly/1t7lgS5
WATCH THE UNVEILING OF THE 2015 370Z NISMO - .http://bit.ly/1nbGvP7
VIEWS THE 2015 Nissan 370Z NISMO Photo Gallery -
Built in 1895-1896, this Chicago School-style thirteen-story skyscraper was designed by Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler for the Guaranty Construction Company. It was initially commissioned by Hascal L. Taylor, whom approached Dankmar Adler to build "the largest and best office building in the city,” but Taylor, whom wanted to name the building after himself, died in 1894, just before the building was announced. Having already had the building designed and ready for construction, the Guaranty Construction Company of Chicago, which already had resources lined up to build the project, bought the property and had the building constructed, with the building instead being named after them. In 1898, the building was renamed after the Prudential Insurance Company, which had refinanced the project and became a major tenant in the building after it was completed. Prudential had the terra cotta panels above the main entrances to the building modified to display the company’s name in 1898, upon their acquisition of a partial share in the ownership of the tower. The building became the tallest building in Buffalo upon its completion, and was a further refinement of the ideas that Sullivan had developed with the Wainwright Building in St. Louis, which was built in 1890-92, and featured a design with more Classical overtones, which were dropped with the design of the Guaranty Building in favor of a more purified Art Nouveau and Chicago School aesthetic, and with more intricate visual detail, with the ornate terra cotta panels cladding the entire structure, leaving very few areas with sparse detail. The building is an early skyscraper with a steel frame supporting the terra cotta panel facade, a departure from earlier load bearing masonry structures that had previously been predominant in many of the same applications, and expresses this through large window openings at the base and a consistent wall thickness, as there was no need to make the exterior walls thicker at the base to support the load from the structure above. The building also contrasts with the more rigid historically-influenced Classical revivalism that was growing in popularity at the time, and follows Sullivan’s mantra of “form ever follows function” despite having a lot of unnecessary detail on the exterior cladding and interior elements. The building’s facade also emphasizes its verticality through continual vertical bands of windows separated by pilasters that are wider on the first two floors, with narrower pilasters above, with the entire composition of the building following the tripartite form influenced by classical columns, with distinct sections comprising the base, shaft, and capital, though being a radical and bold abstraction of the form compared to the historical literalism expressed by most of its contemporaries, more directly displaying the underlying steel structure of the building.
The building is clad in rusty terra cotta panels which feature extensive Sullivanesque ornament inspired by the Art Nouveau movement, which clad the entirety of the building’s facades along Church Street and Pearl Street, with simpler red brick and painted brick cladding on the facades that do not front public right-of-ways, which are visible when the building is viewed from the south and west. The white painted brick cladding on the south elevation marks the former location of the building’s light well, which was about 30 feet wide and 68 feet deep, and was infilled during a 1980s rehabilitation project, adding an additional 1,400 square feet of office space, and necessitating an artificial light source to be installed above the stained glass ceiling of the building’s lobby. The building’s windows are mostly one-over-one double-hung windows in vertical columns, with one window per bay, though this pattern is broken at the painted portions of the non-principal facades, which feature paired one-over-one windows, on the second floor of the principal facades, which features Chicago-style tripartite windows and arched transoms over the building’s two main entry doors, on the thirteenth floor of the principal facades, which features circular oxeye windows, and at the base, which features large storefront windows that include cantilevered sections with shed glass roofs that wrap around the columns at the base of the building. The building’s terra cotta panels feature many natural and geometric motifs based on plants and crystalline structures, the most common being a “seed pod” motif that symbolizes growth, with a wide variation of patterns, giving the facade a dynamic appearance, which is almost overwhelming, but helps to further grant the building a dignified and monumental appearance, and is a signature element of many of the significant works of Adler and Sullivan, as well as Sullivan’s later independent work. The building’s pilasters halve in number but double in thickness towards the base, with wide window openings underneath pairs of window bays above on the first and second floors, with the pilasters terminating at circular columns with large, decorative, ornate terra cotta capitals in the central bays, and thick rectilinear pilasters at the corners and flanking the entry door openings. The circular columns penetrate the extruded storefront windows and shed glass roofs below, which formed display cases for shops in the ground floor of the building when it first opened, and feature decorative copper trim and mullions framing the large expanses of plate glass. The base of the building is clad in medina sandstone panels, as well as medina sandstone bases on the circular columns. The major entry doors feature decorative copper trim surrounds, a spandrel panel with ornate cast copper detailing above and the name “Guaranty” emblazoned on the face of each of the two panels at the two entrances, decorative transoms above with decorative copper panels as headers, and arched transoms on the second floor with decorative terra cotta trim surrounds. Each of the two major entrance doors is flanked by two ornate Art Nouveau-style wall-mounted sconces mounted on the large pilasters, with smaller, partially recessed pilasters on either side. The building features two cornices with arched recesses, with the smaller cornice running as a belt around the transition between the base and the shaft portions of the building, with lightbulbs in each archway, and the larger cornice, which extends further out from the face of the building, running around the top of the building’s Swan Street and Pearl Street facades, with a circular oxeye window in each archway. The lower corner recessed into the facade at the ends, while the upper cornice runs around the entire top of the facade above, with geometric motifs in the central portions and a large cluster of leaves in a pattern that is often repeated in Sullivan’s other work at the corners. The spandrel panels between the windows on the shaft portion of the building feature a cluster of leaves at the base and geometric patterns above, with a repeat of the same recessed arch detail as the cornice at the sill line of each window. The pilasters feature almost strictly geometric motifs, with a few floral motifs thrown in at key points to balance the composition of the facade with the windows. A small and often overlooked feature of the ground floor is a set of stone steps up to an entrance at the northwest corner of the building, which features a decorative copper railing with Sullivanesque and Art Nouveau-inspired ornament, which sits next to a staircase to the building’s basement, which features a more utilitarian modern safety railing in the middle.
The interior of the building was heavily renovated over the years before being partially restored in 1980, with the lobby being reverted back to its circa 1896 appearance. The Swan Street vestibule has been fully restored, featuring a marble ceiling, decorative mosaics around the top of the walls, a decorative antique brass light fixture with Art Nouveau detailing and a ring of lightbulbs in the center, the remnant bronze stringer of a now-removed staircase to the second floor in a circular glass wall at the north end of the space, and a terazzo floor. The main lobby, located immediately to the west, features a Tiffany-esque stained glass ceiling with ellipsoid and circular panels set into a bronze frame that once sat below a skylight at the base of the building’s filled-in light well, marble cladding on the walls, mosaics on the ceiling and around the top of the walls, a bronze staircase with ornate railing at the west end of the space, which features a semi-circular landing, a basement staircase with a brass railing, a terrazzo floor, and multiple historic three-bulb wall sconces, as well as brass ceiling fixtures matching those in the vestibule. The building’s elevators, located in an alcove near the base of the staircase, features a decorative richly detailed brass screen on the exterior, with additional decorative screens above, with the elevator since having been enclosed with glass to accommodate modern safety standards and equipment, while preserving the visibility of the original details. Originally, when the building was built, the elevators descended open shafts into a screen wall in the lobby, with the elevators originally being manufactured by the Sprague Electric Railway and Motor Company, with these being exchanged in 1903 for water hydraulic elevators that remained until a renovation in the 1960s. Sadly, most of the historic interior detailing of the upper floors was lost during a series of renovations in the 20th Century, which led to them being fully modernized during the renovation in the 1980s, with multiple tenant finish projects since then further modifying the interiors of the upper floors.
The building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1973, and designated a National Historic Landmark in 1975, owing to its architectural significance, and to help save the building, which had suffered a major fire in 1974 that led to the city of Buffalo seeking to demolish it. A renovation in the early 1980s managed to modernize the building while restoring the lobby and the exterior, which was carried out under the direction of the firm CannonDesign, and partial funding from federal historic tax credits. The building was purchased in 2002 by Hodgson Russ, a law firm, which subsequently further renovated the building to suit their needs, converting the building into their headquarters in 2008. This renovation was carried out under the direction of Gensler Architects and the local firm Flynn Battaglia Architects. The building today houses offices on the upper floors, with a visitor center, known as the Guaranty Interpretative Center, on the first floor, with historic tours offered of some of the building’s exterior and interior spaces run by Preservation Buffalo Niagara. The building was one of the most significant early skyscrapers, and set a precedent for the modern skyscrapers that began to be built half a century later.
LEGO Ideas update #29 "Minifigure refinements" is now published:
ideas.lego.com/projects/102740/updates …
(◕‿◕✿)
#AdaLovelace
Twitter - twitter.com/LegoLovelace/status/685492070098833409
'Lovelace & Babbage' LEGO Ideas project - ideas.lego.com/projects/102740
Alex had a unique approach to the production of his design folio work. Alex was constantly drawing. He spent most of his classtime just drawing, even when he was supposed to be doing something else. He needed to draw to think. So what you see here isn't necessarily pretty but this folio is stuffed with ideas. Alex's approach demonstrates precisely and accurately the method of idea generation and refinement promoted by the department. Note the large number of drawings on eachpage. this allows the student to easily cross reference and tag from one idea to the next. Extensive annotation also helps to reveal design thinking and comments should always be relevant and refer back to the specification. It is clear that Alex has a thorough understanding of the more technical aspects of the course and he repeatedly suggests ways in which his concepts might be made.
Alex went on to do very well at Higher Product Design. Some of his work also features on this site. He's now studying maths at Warwick University.
The department has been building up a library of design related reference books over the last few years. Pupils are encouraged to make use of these books on a regular basis. The photographs here demonstrate the tremendous wealth of content contained therein.
The sequence has been shot in such a way that the cover of the book is shown first and a few sample pages are included to give the student an idea of the content the book contains. Pupils may then approach staff and request a short term loan.
The department has been building up a library of design related reference books over the last few years. Pupils are encouraged to make use of these books on a regular basis. The photographs here demonstrate the tremendous wealth of content contained therein.
The sequence has been shot in such a way that the cover of the book is shown first and a few sample pages are included to give the student an idea of the content the book contains. Pupils may then approach staff and request a short term loan.
* a few improvements & refinements
- PVC gussets on pouch straps
- zippered mesh underpocket
* complete system now only 12 oz.
* built to accommodate OR 10L drybag
Taking the top-voted item from the H-form groups came up with up to 4 approaches. They then moved to another group's diagram and added the steps necessary to achieve one approach. Moving to the next group's diagram they added likely barriers to the approach already annotated.
The department has been building up a library of design related reference books over the last few years. Pupils are encouraged to make use of these books on a regular basis. The photographs here demonstrate the tremendous wealth of content contained therein.
The sequence has been shot in such a way that the cover of the book is shown first and a few sample pages are included to give the student an idea of the content the book contains. Pupils may then approach staff and request a short term loan.