View allAll Photos Tagged Testbed

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

Some background:

The Northrop Grumman-IAI F-24 is the latest reincarnation of the USAF "Lightweight Fighter Program" which dates back to the 1950ies and started with the development of Northrop's F-5 "Freedom Fighter".

 

The 1st generation F-5 became very successful in the export market and saw a long line of development, including the much more powerful F-5E "Tiger II" and the F-20 Tigershark (initially called F-5G). Northrop had high hopes for the F-20 in the international market; however, policy changes following Ronald Reagan's election meant the F-20 had to compete for sales against aircraft like the F-16, the USAF's latest fighter design (which was politically favored). The F-20 development program was eventually abandoned in 1986 after three prototypes had been built and a fourth partially completed.

 

But this was not the end for Northrop’s Lightweight Fighter. In the early 1980s, two X-29As experimental aircraft were built by Grumman from two existing Northrop F-5A Freedom Fighter airframes. The Grumman X-29 was a testbed for forward-swept wings, canard control surfaces, and other novel aircraft technologies. The aerodynamic instability of this arrangement increased agility but required the use of computerized fly-by-wire control. Composite materials were used to control the aeroelastic divergent twisting experienced by forward-swept wings, also reducing the weight. The NASA test program continued from 1984 to 1991 and the X-29s flew 242 times, gathering valuable data and breaking ground for new aerodynamic technologies of 4th and 5th generation fighters.

 

Even though no service aircraft directly evolved from the X-29, its innovative FBW system as well as the new material technologies also opened the door for an updated F-20 far beyond the 1990ies. It became clear that ever expensive and complex aircraft could not be the answer to modern, asymmetrical warfare in remote corners of the world, with exploding development costs and just a limited number of aircraft in service that could not generate true economies of scale, esp. when their state-of-the-art design would not permit any export.

Anyway, a global market for simpler fighter aircraft was there, as 1st generation F-16s as well as the worldwide, aging F-5E fleet and types of Soviet/Russian origin like the MiG-29 provided the need for a modern, yet light and economical jet fighter. Contemporary types like the Indian HAL Tejas, the Swedish Saab Gripen, the French Dassault Rafale and the Pakistani/Chinese FC-1/JF-17 ”Thunder” proved this trend among 4th - 4.5th generation fighter aircraft.

 

Northrop Grumman (Northrop bought Grumman in 1994) initiated studies and basic design work on a respective New Lightweight Fighter (NLF) as a private venture in 1995. Work on the NLF started at a slow pace, as the company was busy with re-structuring.

The idea of an updated lightweight fighter was fueled by another source, too: Israel. In 1998 IAI started looking in the USA for a development partner for a new, light fighter that would replace its obsolete Kfir fleet and partly relieve its F-16 and F-15 fleet from interception tasks. The domestic project for that role, the IAI Lavi, had been stillborn, but lots of its avionics and research were still at hand and waited for an airframe for completion.

The new aircraft for the IAF was to be superior to the MiG-29, at least on par with the F-16C/D, but easier to maintain, smaller and overall cheaper. Since the performance profiles appeared to be similar to what Northrop Grumman was developing under the NLF label, the US company eventually teamed up with IAI in 2000 and both started the mutual project "Namer" (=נמר, “Tiger” in Hebrew), which eventually lead to the F-24 I for the IAF which kept its project name for service and to the USAF’s F-24A “Tigershark”.

 

The F-24, as the NLF, was based on the F-20 airframe, but outwardly showed only little family heritage, onle the forward fuselage around the cockpit reminds of the original F-5 design . Many aerodynamic details, e. g. the air intakes and air ducts, were taken over from the X-29, though, as the experimental aircraft and its components had been developed for extreme maneuvers and extra high agility. Nevertheless, the X-29's forward-swept wing was considered to be too exotic and fragile for a true service aircraft, but the F-24 was to feature an Active Aeroelastic Wing (AAW) system.

 

AAW Technology integrates wing aerodynamics, controls, and structure to harness and control wing aeroelastic twist at high speeds and dynamic pressures. By using multiple leading and trailing edge controls like "aerodynamic tabs", subtle amounts of aeroelastic twist can be controlled to provide large amounts of wing control power, while minimizing maneuver air loads at high wing strain conditions or aerodynamic drag at low wing strain conditions. This system was initially tested on the X-29 and later on the X-53 research aircraft, a modified F-18, until 2006.

 

Both USAF and IAF versions feature this state-of-the-art aerodynamic technology, but it is uncertain if other customers will receive it. While details concerning the F-24's system have not been published yet, it is assumed that its AAW is so effective that canard foreplanes could be omitted without sacrificing lift and maneuverability, and that drag is effectively minimized as the wing profile can be adjusted according to the aircraft’s speed, altitude, payload and mission – much like a VG wing, but without its clumsy and heavy swiveling mechanism which has to bear high g forces. As a result, the F-24 is, compared to the F-20, which could carry an external payload of about 3.5 tons, rumored to be able to carry up to 5 tons of ordnance.

 

The delta wing shape proved to be a perfect choice for the required surface and flap actuators inside of the wings, and it would also offer a very good compromise between lift and drag for a wide range of performance. Anyway, there was one price to pay: in order to keep the wing profile thin and simple, the F-24’s landing gear retracts into the lower fuselage, leaving the aircraft with a relatively narrow track.

 

Another major design factor for the outstanding performance of this rather small aircraft was weight reduction and structural integrity – combined with simplicity, ruggedness and a modular construction which would allow later upgrades. Instead of “going big” and expensive, the new F-24 was to create its performance through dedicated loss of weight, which was in some part also a compensation for the AAW system in the wings and its periphery.

 

Weight was saved wherever possible, e .g. a newly developed, lightweight M199A1 gatling gun. This 20mm cannon is a three-barreled, heavily modified version of the already “stripped” M61A2 gun in the USAF’s current F-18E and F-22. One of the novel features is a pneumatic drive instead of the traditional electric mechanism, what not only saves weight but also improves trigger response. The new gun weighs only a mere 65kg (the six-barreled M61A2 weighs 92kg, the original M61A1 112 kg), but still reaches a burst rate of fire of 1.800 RPM (about 800 RPM under cyclic fire, standard practice is to fire the cannon in 30 to 50-round bursts, though) and a muzzle velocity of 1.050 metres per second (3,450 ft/s) with a PGU-28/B round.

 

While the F-16 was and is still made from 80% aluminum alloys and only from 3% composites, the F-24 makes major use of carbon fiber and other lightweight materials, which make up about 40% of the aircraft’s structure, plus an increased share of Titanium and Magnesium alloys. As a consequence and through many other weight-saving measures like keeping stealth capabilities to a minimum (even though RAM was deliberately used and many details designed to have a natural low radar signature, resulting in modest radar cross-section (RCS) reductions), a single, relatively small engine, a fuel-efficient F404-GE-402 turbofan, is enough to make the F-24 a fast and very agile aircraft, coupled with a good range. The F-24’s thrust/weight ratio is considerably higher than 1, and later versions with a vectored thrust nozzle (see below) will take this level of agility even further – with the pilot becoming the limiting factor for the aircraft’s performance.

 

USAF and IAF F-24s are outfitted with Northrop Grumman's AN/APG-80 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, also used in the F-16 Block 60 aircraft. Other customers might only receive the AN/APG-68, making the F-24 comparable to the F-16C/D.

 

The first prototype, the YF-24, flew on 8th of March 2008, followed by two more aircraft plus a static airframe until summer 2010. In early 2011 the USAF placed an initial order of 101 aircraft (probably also to stir export sales – the earlier lightweight fighters from Northrop suffered from the fact that the manufacturer’s country would not use the aircraft in its own forces). These initial aircraft will replace older F-16 in the interceptor role, or free them for fighter bomber tasks. The USN and USMC also showed interest in the aircraft for their aggressor squadrons, for dissimilar air combat training. A two-seater, called the F-24B, is supposed to follow soon, too, and a later version for 2020 onwards, tentatively designated F-24C, is to feature an even stronger F404 engine and a 3D vectoring nozzle.

 

Israel is going to produce its own version domestically from late 2014 on, which will exclusively be used by the IAF. These aircraft will be outfitted with different avionics, built by Elta in Israel, and cater to national requirements which focus more on multi-purpose service, while the USAF focusses with its F-24A on aerial combat and interception tasks.

 

International interest for the F-24A is already there: in late 2013 Grumman stated that initial talks have been made with various countries, and potential export candidates from 2015 on are Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, Finland, Norway, Australia and Japan.

  

General F-24A characteristics:

Crew: 1 pilot

Length: 47 ft 4 in (14.4 m)

Wingspan: 27 ft 11.9 in / 8.53 m; with wingtip missiles (26 ft 8 in/ 8.13 m; without wingtip missiles)

Height: 13 ft 10 in (4.20 m)

Wing area: 36.55 m² (392 ft²)

Empty weight: 13.150 lb (5.090 kg)

Loaded weight: 15.480 lb (6.830 kg)

Max. take-off weight: 27.530 lb (12.500 kg)

 

Powerplant

1× General Electric F404-GE-402 turbofan with a dry thrust of 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) and 17,750 lbf (79.2 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 2+

Combat radius: 300 nmi (345 mi, 556 km); for hi-lo-hi mission with 2 × 330 US gal (1,250 L) drop tanks

Ferry range: 1,490 nmi (1715 mi, 2759 km); with 3 × 330 US gal (1,250 L) drop tanks

Service ceiling: 55,000 ft (16,800 m)

Rate of climb: 52,800 ft/min (255 m/s)

Wing loading: 70.0 lb/ft² (342 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 1.09 (1.35 with loaded weight & 50% fuel)

 

Armament

1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M199A1 3-barreled Gatling cannon in the lower fuselage with 400 RPG

Eleven external hardpoints (two wingtip tails, six underwing hardpoints, three underfuselage hardpoints) and a total capacity of 11.000 lb (4.994 kg) of missiles (incl. AIM 9 Sidewinder and AIM 120 AMRAAM), bombs, rockets, ECM pods and drop tanks for extended range.

  

The kit and its assembly:

A spontaneous project. This major kitbash was inspired by fellow user nighthunter at whatifmodelers.com, who came up with a profile of a mashed-up US fighter, created “out of boredom”. The original idea was called F-21C, and it was to be a domestic successor to the IAI Kfirs which had been used by the US as aggressor aircraft in USN and USMC service for a few years.

 

As a weird(?) coincidence I had many of the necessary ingredients for this fictional aircraft in store, even though some parts and details were later changed. This model here is an interpretation of the original design. The idea was spun further, and the available parts that finally went into the model also had some influence on design and background.

I thank nighthunter for sharing the early ideas, inviting me to take the design to the hardware stage (sort of…) and adapting my feedback into new design sketches, too, which, in return, inspired the model building process.

 

Well, what went into this thing? To cook up a F-24 à la Dizzyfugu you just need (all in 1:72):

● Fuselage from a Hasegawa X-29, including the cockpit and the landing gear

● Fin and nose cone from an Italeri F-16A

● Inner wings from a (vintage) Hasegawa MiG-21F

● Outer wings from a F-4 (probably a J, Hasegawa or Fujimi)

 

The wing construction deviates from nighthunter’s original idea. The favorite ingredients would have been F-16XL or simple Mirage III wings, but I found the composite wing to be more attractive and “different”. The big F-16XL wings, despite their benefit of a unique shape, might also have created scale/size problems with a F-20 style fuselage? So I built hybrid wings: The MiG-21 landing gear wells were filled with putty and the F-4 outer wings simply glued onto the MiG inner wing sections, which were simply cut down in span. It sounds like an unlikely combo, but these parts fit together almost perfectly! In order to hide the F-4 origins I modified them to carry wingtip launch rails, though, which were also part of nighthunter’s original design.

 

The AAW technology detail mentioned in the background came in handy as it explains the complicated wing shape and the fact that the landing gear retracts into the fuselage, not into the wings, which would have been more plausible… Anyway, there’s still room for a simpler export version, with Mirage III or Kfir C.2/7 wings, and maybe canards?

 

Using the X-29 as basis also made fitting the new wings onto the area-ruled fuselage pretty easy, as I could use the wing root parts from the X-29 to bridge the gap. The original, forward-swept wings were just cut away, and the remains used as consoles for the new hybrid delta wings. Took some SERIOUS putty work, but the result is IMHO fine.

 

The bigger/square X-29 air intakes were taken over, and they change the look of the aircraft, making it look less F-5-ish than a true F-20 fuselage. For the same reason I kept the large fairing at the fin base, combining it with a bigger F-16 tail, though, as a counter-balance to the new, bigger wings. Again, the F-16 fin was/is part of nighthunter’s idea, so the model stays true to the original concept.

 

For the same reason I omitted the original X-29 nose, which is rather pointy, sports vanes and a large sensor boom. The F-16 nose was a plausible choice, as the AN/APG-80 is also carried by late Fighting Falcons, and its shape fits well, too.

 

All around the hull, some small details like radar warning sensors, pitots and air scoops were added. Not really necessary, but such thing add IMHO to the overall impression of such a fictional aircraft beyond the prototype stage.

 

Cockpit and landing gear were taken OOB, I just added a pilot figure and slightly modified the seat.

 

The ordnance was puzzled together from the scrap box, the AIM-9Ls come from the same F-4 kit which donated its outer wings, the AIM-120s come from an Italeri NATO weapons kit. The drop tanks belong to an F-16.

  

Painting and markings:

At first I considered an F-24I in IAF markings, or even a Japanese aircraft, but then reverted to one of nighthunter’s initial, simple ideas: an USAF aircraft in the “Hill II” paint scheme (F-16 style), made up from three shades of gray (FS 36118, 36270 and 36375) with low-viz markings and stencils. Dutch/Turkish NF-5A/Bs in the “Hill II” scheme were used as design benchmarks, too. It’s a simple livery, but on this delta wing aircraft it looks pretty interesting. I used enamels, what I had at hand: Humbrol 127 and 126, and Modelmaster's 1723.

 

A light black ink wash was applied, in order to em,phasize the engraved panel lines, in contrast to that, panels were manually highlighted through dry-brushed, lighter shades of gray (Humbrol 27, 166 and 167).

 

“Hill II” also adds to a generic, realistic touch for this whif. Doing an exotic air force thing is rather easy, but creating a convincing whif for a huge military machinery like the USAF’s takes more subtlety, I think.

 

The cockpit was painted in medium Gray (Dark Gull Grey, FS 36231, Humbrol 140), as well as the radome. The landing gear and the air intakes were painted white. The radome was painted with Revell 47 and dry-brushed with Humbrol 140.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various USAF aircraft, including sheets from an Airfix F-117, an Italeri F-15E and even an Academy OV-10D.

  

Tadah: a hardware tribute to an idea, born from boredom - and the aircraft does not look even bad at all? What I wanted to achieve was to make the F-24 neither look like a F-20, nor a Saab Gripen clone, as the latter comes close in overall shape, size and design.

PictionID:43723279 - Title:Boeing B-47 (55-2104; c/n 44450) USN MASDC 13May75 [Peter B.Lewis via RJF] - Catalog:17 - Filename:17.S_000161.tif- -----Image from the René Francillon Photo Archive. This images is from a 35mm slide. Having had his interest in aviation sparked by being at the receiving end of B-24s bombing occupied France when he was 7-yr old, René Francillon turned aviation into both his vocation and avocation. Most of his professional career was in the United States, working for major aircraft manufacturers and airport planning/design companies. All along, he kept developing a second career as an aviation historian, an activity that led him to author more than 50 books and 400 articles published in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and elsewhere. Far from “hanging on his spurs,” he plans to remain active as an author well into his eighties.-------PLEASE TAG this image with any information you know about it, so that we can permanently store this data with the original image file in our Digital Asset Management System.--------------SOURCE INSTITUTION: San Diego Air and Space Museum Archive

The Project Gunship II aircraft was a substantial improvement over the original AC-47s. Seven additional airframes were converted to the "Plain Jane" configuration in 1968. One AC-130A (serial number: 55-0011) was equipped by the Gunship System Program Office at Wright-Patterson AFB with the "Suprise Package" upgrade of two 40 mm Bofors cannons in place of the aft pair of 20 mm Vulcans, General Electric ASQ-145 Low-Level Light TV 9 (LLLTV) and a Konrad AVQ-18 laser designator/rangefinder, and a new AYK-9 digital fire control computer. This became the AC-130A “Pave Pronto” configuration prototype and testbed for the avionics and armament for the AC-130E.

 

In this image, the “Surprise Package” prototype (serial number: 55-0011), nicknamed (cunningly) "Surprise Package" and later "Night Stalker" when upgraded to the Pave Pronto configuration, conducts tests of its new weapons systems. This aircraft flew with the 4413th Combat Crew Training Squadron (4413th CCTS), the 415th Special Operations Training Squadron (415th SOTS), the 16th Special Operations Squadron (16th SOS), and finally the 711th SOS before being retired on 15 November 1994. The new 40 mm Bofors L/60 cannons are in the rear where the Vulcans used to be. Note the ASQ-145 in the forward entry door. It is still flying with the ramp down!

 

Wellington prototype trolleybus of March 2003, No. 301, is viewed at the Lyall Bay trolleybus terminus at Hungerford Rd. on Saturday, 16 August 2003, during an enthusiasts outing along with Volvo 264 and the Omnibus Society's preserved WCT 119, which must now be facing an uncertain future at the Society's site at Gracefield in Wellington's Hutt Valley since the abandonment of the Wellington system at the end of October 2017.

 

Nos. 301 (of 8 March 2003), 302 and 303 were the only three Wellington scratch built Designline-bodied trolleybuses to sport the Stagecoach livery. Has Designline B39D bodywork.

 

By the early 2000s, active consideration was being given to fleet renewal in light of the then aging Volvo B58 trolleybuses. Bus design and electronics had both moved on a lot since the early 1980s. To test out new technologies, two prototypes were developed. One, Volvo 264, became a testbed for new electrical equipment. The other (Designline 301, delivered in 2003) was used to test new chassis and body design ideas, while using donor electrical equipment, steering and the rear axle from Volvo 206 with its worm drive gear arrangement. [A worm drive is a gear arrangement in which a worm (which is a gear in the form of a screw) meshes with a worm gear (which is similar in appearance to a spur gear). The two elements are also called the worm screw and worm wheel. The terminology is often confused by imprecise use of the term worm gear to refer to the worm, the worm gear, or the worm drive as a unit. Like other gear arrangements, a worm drive can reduce rotational speed or transmit higher torque. A worm is an example of a screw, one of the six simple machines. One of the major advantages of worm gear drive units are that they can transfer motion in 90 degrees.]

 

Test results were sufficiently positive that two further Designline-built prototypes (Nos. 302 and 303) were ordered. Their chassis and bodies were similar to those of No. 301, but they were fined brand new Brazilian control gear. Delivered in 2005, they entered service with Stagecoach.

However, later that year, the Scottish company sold its New Zealand interests to local investment firm, Infratil. Infratil set up a subsidiary, NZ Bus, to run its new acquisition, and quickly introduced separate branded liveries for various operations.

 

The trolleybuses came under yellow and black "GO Wellington" branding, arguably the most attractive standard colour scheme applied to the city's trolleybuses, certainly since the start of the all-over red livery in the mid-1950s.

 

Prototypes 302 and 303 proved successful, and a production order was placed with Designline for 57 technically similar, but longer vehicles, fined with tag axles. These were delivered 2007-2009, replacing all the Volvos. All three Designline-built prototypes also remained in service, giving a total contemporary fleet of 60 vehicles.

 

The comparative overall stability of the route structure since 1987, and the delivery of a completely new fleet of vehicles within me last decade, seemed all very positive. But sadly, despite the fleet upgrade, and the environmental advantages of electric traction, the system's closure in 2017 saw the Designline fleet only having a short life span.

 

Rolls-Royce Dart powered Royal Aircraft Establishment Avro (HS) Andover C.1 test-bed XS646 at the IAT held at Boscombe Down 14th June 1992.

 

She carried an underslung pod along with a modified nose. Several Andover C.1's and C.2's plus an Avro 748 were used by the RAE & ETPS on a variety of test and research related duties at the various RAE locations with most ending their days at Boscombe Down.

 

Scanned print

What you're looking at here is the Rolls Royce Camargue, very much the Rolls Royce that time forgot. What can you even say about it? It's one of the most iconic automotive failures in history, and certainly a car that Rolls Royce fans are always very quick to wince at when I mention it at RREC conventions.

 

So where did this curious car come from? To truly understand this mighty machine you need to go back to 1969, where a massive change in the image and style of the world was starting to hold sway. In the world of autos, the curvature of the 1950's and early 60's was giving way to the angles of the 1970's, the decade that gave us the 'Wedge' sportsers and boxy saloon cars.

 

Rolls Royce, who at this point were building three cars, the Phantom VI, the Silver Shadow, and the Silver Shadow Two-Door Saloon (later to be known as the Corniche), were looking for a new design that would drastically alter its image from that of the Shadow. Originally, the intention was to use their new brainchild to replace the Two-Door Saloon, but due to financial difficulty within the Rolls Royce company, later followed by bankruptcy after the RB211 Jet Engine project, the company chose instead to save costs and rebrand it as the Corniche instead.

 

For their new car, Rolls Royce chose not to have it designed in-house like previous models, but went for the first time to Pininfarina of Italy. Throughout the remainder of 1969 the company toyed with many sketches, until in 1970 a final design was chosen and given the go by the Rolls Royce management, with the intention for a launch in either late 1972 or early 1973. Within the company, the project was dubbed "Delta", but was later changed to DY20, with ‘D’ signifying Delta, ‘Y’ signifying it was based on the SY (Silver Shadow) platform, and '20' shortened from 120 which was the car’s wheelbase of 120 inches.

 

But as mentioned, following the amount of money poured into the new Rolls Royce RB211 Jet Engine Project for the Lockheed Tristar, the company was bankrupt as of the 4th February 1971. The result was that the Motor Car Division, whose future now rested in the hands of the Official Receiver, had to look closely at all aspects of the business. This led to the splitting of the Rolls Royce company, with Rolls Royce Motors Ltd. being founded and placed under the ownership of Vickers, whilst the bankrupt Rolls Royce Ltd. was nationalised.

 

During this turbulent period, the DY20 project was closely scrutinised and the Receiver gave the go-ahead to commence the project, but following a critical review of the engineering specification for the car, a decision was taken to delay the launch date until 1975.

 

With development continuing, HJ Mulliner Park Ward, who already built the bodies for the Corniche, were chosen to manufacture the bodies of the DY20 project. In the summer of 1972, the first prototype D1 was released and tested heavily to maintain the standard of reliable excellence that Rolls Royce had been known for. At first the car's initial reception was warm, with people noting that it looked far more futuristic than the Shadow on which it was heavily based. Aside from sharing the same running gear, platform, Rolls Royce V8 engine and a majority of the internal features as the Shadow, the car was endearing in that it was fitted with a new and highly sophisticated bi-level automatic air conditioning system that at that time was the very first car in the world to have such a unit fitted. It was declared that this feature alone was more expensive than a British Leyland Mini! Another change was an instrument board, which many commented wouldn't have looked out of place on the flight deck of a Boeing 747!

 

Throughout 1972 and 73 more prototypes continued to be released and tested, with Rolls Royce giving paramount assistance to HJ Mulliner Park Ward's staff as they rigorously put these cars together. On the 18 January 1973 the body of the first production prototype, assigned D3, was attached to the front and rear sub frame assemblies on the normal Silver Shadow production line with maximum security in place and, following the production line assembly, the car was delivered to the experimental department to begin a period of intensive development work.

 

From May 1973 and all through 1974 production increased but still subject to extreme security. The production sequence was shared between MPW and Crewe. Once the body had been produced in the London factory and despatched to Crewe it was ‘finished painted’, attached to the front and rear sub frames and sent in a part built state back to MPW for all trim, general finishing and testing to take place at Hythe Road.

 

In January 1975, the car was officially launched in Catania, Sicily, and christened the name Camargue, an area situated in the delta of the River Rhône in France. Following a very successful press launch, the car was unveiled to the world on 5 March 1975 and the price quoted was £29,250, which made it the most expensive production car in the world ever at that time. Today, this figure translates out to £272,000. To put the price in perspective with other Rolls-Royce models at the time the Corniche saloon car cost £19,013 and the “Flagship of the Fleet” Phantom VI only cost £21,352!

 

The car was launched in the United States a year later after delays in fitting the cars with US Specification running gear meant that production didn't begin until August 1975. The cost of these cars in the US was $147,000, which today is about $588,000.

 

So, after a turbulent development mired in bankruptcy, a complicated building strategy and a delayed launch in America, did Rolls Royce's gamble with an audaciously designed car pay off?

 

Not in the slightest!

 

Purists recoiled at the sight of the angular corners and straight lines, with its big round headlights and chunky panels that made it look less like a Rolls Royce and more like a Lincoln Continental. They argued that for much, much less, owners could buy a Corniche or a Shadow which looked twice as good and performed just as well. This was then added to by the fuel crisis of the late 1970's, upon which that 6.75L Rolls Royce V8 soaking up petrol at a gallon every 15 miles looked deeply undesirable.

 

In all, only 531 of these cars were ever produced during its 11 year lifetime, but with a few variations. In 1985 a specialist hunting car called the Sbarro was reengineered for an Arabian aristocrat, whilst in 1979 two Camargues were used as testbeds for developments that would later find their way into the Silver Spirit/Spur range, including headlights and other features. In 1985 a single Bentley Camargue was also built, identical except for the changed badge and Grille, although many aftermarket conversions are known to exist. The last two cars rolled off the production line on Christmas Eve 1986 bound for Japan, at a price of £83,000.

 

Today, the Rolls Royce Camargue is a very, very rare car, and you would be hard pressed to find them routinely. In the United States a few continue to roam the countryside, with around 200 of the cars being exported there. Reception of these cars sadly continues to be very critical, with the car often topping people's lists for worst car ever made or ugliest car ever made. Although James May is one of a few people who defend this car, dubbing it "like that pug-faced but well-dressed bloke down the pub", for the most part all people can do is laugh at this car, laugh for the fact that it didn't sell, didn't look good and went through so much trouble to design and build that it was just a rushed embarrassment for the Rolls Royce company.

 

The reputation of these cars is so bad that in spite of its rarity, owners can't even give these things away, with most that I've seen going for as little as £20,000. But a word of advice, stop laughing, and buy their car! £20,000 for a two-door luxury saloon, a pedigree Rolls Royce, and one that once held the distinction of being the world's most expensive production car, you not only get this car for the cost of an equivalent Ford or Vauxhall, but you also make a saving on the original price tag of £252,000, that's over a quarter of a million pounds!

 

Me personally, I absolutely adore these cars! Indeed they're not as pretty as other Rollers, but I consider this a car that you not only have to feel sorry for, considering the background troubles that trailed its development from the start, but one that you have to admire as well. I feel that it's a car that's stood the test of time, a bit of automotive history from the 1970's that shows how reckless and ambitious we were with our car construction, like the Aston Martin Lagonda, brash in the extreme, but lovable all the same.

 

In fact if I had £20,000 right now I'd gladly go out and buy one, not only because I'd be saving a fortune, but also because it's a very personable little car, the kind of car you can't take your eyes off of, the car you could really give a name and love forever.

 

I'd name mine Christie! :D

The slightly woebegone prototype Brown Boveri Gas Turbine locomotive 18000 which spent its working life hauling express passenger trains from Paddington before being withdrawn in late 1960. The machine, as is perhaps inevitable with prototypes, proved neither reliable nor cheap to run. After withdrawal the locomotive was kept at Swindon Works for four years before being repatriated to mainland europe where the gas turbine was removed and the locomotive used as a testbed for experiments on rail-wheel interaction. Once these experiments were concluded the locomotive was put on display in Vienna in 1975 and was eventually secured for preservation in the UK in the early 1990s initially being stored at Crewe.

Although there is no realistic possibility of re-instating the original type of power unit, it is still good to see that the locomotive is safely in preservation. Externally, some repairs are needed, to be followed by a repaint to the original livery of black and silver. Internally, there is a good deal of conservation to be undertaken. The intention is to use 18000 as the focal point of a display relating to the post WW2 business plan for the 1950s, published by the GWR under the title 'NEXT STATION', of which the new gas turbine electric locomotive was an important part. (With thanks to the Didcot Railway Centre website for the above information).

Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner 40693/4 "Boeing 784"

Airbus A380-861

MSN 004 [Engine Alliance testbed]

F-WWDD 'VNO' ['#A380' 'iflyA380.com' decals]

 

iflya380.com/

 

Airbus S.A.S.

 

Copyright © 2016 A380spotter. All rights reserved.

  

www.farnborough.com

 

A railcar carrying carrying an electronic testbed version of a U.S. Navy Trident D5 submarine-launched ballistic missile is positioned at the rail yard at NASA's Kennedy Space Center so the missile can be moved onto a custom transport trailer for transport to the interactive test facility at the Naval Ordnance Test Unit, or NOTU, located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station adjacent to the space center. The inert missile will be used to evaluate the new facility. The space center, which has transformed into a multi-user spaceport servicing numerous launch vehicles, spacecraft and companies, retains numerous transportation hubs including the railway system that connects the center to the Florida mainland and the rest of the Florida East Coast railroad network. Photo credit: Bill White

ex Cello Aviation RJ100 is now registered to Airbus and will be used for research into electronic propulsion systems.

Boeing 777-9X. Boeing. N779XW. MSN: 64240

Century 2000 was an US based Travel Club.

N5858 was a Convair CV-880 (c/n 22-00-46M) that was used as testbed (N8488H) from February 1961 to be sold in July 963 to Japan Air Lines as JA8026. It was retired in October 1970 abd sold to Boeing Aircraft Holding Company in March 1971 as n5858. In October 1971 it was sold to Aero American and in April 1972 the aircraft was acquired by IAL International Air Leases. Between May and October 1972 the plane was leased to the Greek Jonian Airways. Returned to the lessor, the plane was prepared to be leased to Century 2000 but never taken up. The plane was instead shortly leased to US Universal between March and July 1973. In August 1973 it was leased to Holiday Magc Finland. In May 1975 the aircraft was oeprating for Philodendrone. and in May 1979 leased to Monarch Aviation, always as N5858. In August 1979 it was converted to Cargo and sold to Eight Eighty Partnership than in December 1979 reregistered the plane as N54CP . In February 1989 it was sold to Central American Airways. It was eventually retired in December 1984 and stored at SJU. between 1985 and 1990 it was operated at SJU as fire training Airframe and then broken up.

Slide taken at MIA during the winter 1972-1973. The palne still wer the basic Japan Airlines color schem with Century 2000 titles.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In the aftermath of the Second World War, Sweden required a strong air defense, utilizing the newly developed jet propulsion technology. The original concept had been designed around a mostly straight wing, but after Swedish engineers had obtained German research data on swept-wing designs, the prototype was altered to incorporate a 25° sweep. In order to make the wing as thin as possible, Saab elected to locate the retractable undercarriage in the aircraft's fuselage rather than into the wings.

 

Extensive wind tunnel testing had also influenced aspects of the aircraft's aerodynamics, such as stability and trim across the aircraft's speed range. In order to test the design of the swept wing further and avoid any surprises, it was decided to modify a Saab Safir. It received the designation Saab 201 and a full-scale swept wing for a series of flight tests. The first 'final' sketches of the aircraft, incorporating the new information, were drawn in January 1946.

 

The originally envisioned powerplant for the new fighter type was the de Havilland Goblin turbojet engine. However, in December 1945, information on the newer and more powerful de Havilland Ghost engine became available. The new engine was deemed to be ideal for Saab's in-development aircraft, as not only did the Ghost engine had provisions for the use of a central circular air intake, the overall diameter of the engine was favorable for the planned fuselage dimensions, too. Thus, following negotiations between de Havilland and Saab, the Ghost engine was selected to power the type and built in license as the RM 2.

 

By February 1946 the main outline of the proposed aircraft had been clearly defined. In autumn 1946, following the resolution of all major questions of principal and the completion of the project specification, the Swedish Air Force formally ordered the completion of the design and that three prototype aircraft be produced, giving the proposed type the designation J 29. After a thorough test program, production of the type commenced in 1948 and, in May 1951, the first deliveries of operational production aircraft were received by F 13 Norrköping. The J 29 proved to be very successful and several variants and updates of the Tunnan were produced, including a dedicated reconnaissance variant, a two seat trainer and an all-weather fighter with an onboard radar

 

However, Sweden foresaw that there would soon be a need for a jet fighter that could intercept bombers at high altitude and also successfully engage fighters. During September 1949, the Swedish Air Force, via the Swedish Defence Material Administration, released a requirement for a cutting-edge interceptor aircraft that was envisioned to be capable of attacking hostile bomber aircraft in the transonic speed range. As released, this requirement specified a top speed of Mach speed 1.4 to 1.5. (1956, the specified speed was revised and raised to Mach 1.7-1.8, and eventually led to the Saab 35 Draken). With the barely supersonic Saab 32 Lansen just under development, and intended for different roles than being a nimble day fighter, the company searched for a way to either achieve supersonic flight through modifications of an existing type or at least gather sufficient data and develop and try the new technologies necessary to meet the 1949 requirements.

 

Since Sweden did not have a truly supersonic aircraft in its inventory (not even an experimental type), Saab decided to convert the Saab 29 into a supersonic testbed, with the outlook to develop an interim day fighter that could replace the various Tunnan fighter versions and support the new Lansen fleet until a fully capable Mach 1.5+ interceptor was ready for service. Even though the type was regarded as a pure experimental aircraft, the designation remained close to the J29 nomenclature in order to secure military funding for the project and to confuse eventual spies. Consequently, the P29 was initially presented as a new J29 version (hence the “G” suffix).

 

The P29G was based on a heavily modified production J29B airframe, which was built in two versions and only in two specimens. Work on the first airframe started in 1952, just when the first Saab 32 prototype made its maiden flight. The initial challenge consisted of integrating two relatively compact axial flow jet engines with afterburners into the fuselage, since the J29’s original RM2, even in its late afterburner variant, was not able to safely deliver the necessary thrust for the intended supersonic flight program. After long negotiations, Saab was able to procure a small number of Westinghouse J34-WE-42 turbojets from the USA, which delivered as a pair 40% more thrust than the original RM2B. The engines were only delivered under the restriction that they would exclusively be used in connection with the supersonic research program.

 

Through a thorough re-construction, the Saab team was able to mount the new engines into the lower rear fuselage, and, internally, the air intake duct had to be modified and forked behind the landing gear wells. Due to the significantly widened rear fuselage, the P29G became quickly nicknamed “Kurviga Tunnan” (= “Curvy Barrel”). Even though the widened rear fuselage increased the aircraft’s frontal cross section, the modified shape had the (unintended) effect of area ruling, a welcome side benefit which became apparent during the flight test and which largely promoted the P29G’s gain of top speed.

 

Another special and unique feature of the P29G was a special wing attachment system. It consisted of two strengthened, open box spars in the fuselage with additional attachment points along the wing roots, which allowed different wings to be switched with relatively little effort. However, due to this modification, the wing tanks (with a total capacity of 900l inside of the J29s standard wings) were lost and only 2.150l in the Saab 29’s standard fuselage tanks could be carried – but this was, for a research aircraft, not regarded as a major weakness, and compensated for the wing attachment system’s additional weight. The original wing-mounted pitots were replaced by a single, massive sensor boom attached to the aircraft’s nose above the air intake, slightly set-off to starboard in order to give the pilot an unobstructed view.

 

The first P29G's maiden flight, marked “Gul Urban” (Yellow U), took place in July 1955. The aircraft behaved normally, even though the center of gravity had markedly shifted backwards and the overall gain of weight made the aircraft slightly unstable along the longitudinal axis. During the initial, careful attempts to break the sound barrier, it soon became apparent that both the original wings as well as the original air intake shape limited the P29G's potential. In its original form, the P29G could only barely pass Mach 1 in level flight.

 

As a consequence, the second P29G, which had been under conversion from another J29B airframe since mid-1954, received more thorough modifications. The air intake was lengthened and widened, and in order to make it more effective at supersonic speed it received a sharp lip. Wind tunnel tests with the first machine led to a modified tail, too: the fin was now taller and further swept back, the stabilizer was moved to a higher position, resulting in a cruciform layout. The original single-piece stabilizer was furthermore replaced by a two-piece, all-moving construction with a 45° sweep and a thinner profile. This not only improved the aerodynamics at high speed, it also suppressed the longitudinal instability problem, even though this was never really cured.

 

Due to the even higher all-up weight of the new aircraft, the landing gear was reinforced and the 2nd P29G received an experimental suspension system on its main legs with higher spring travel, which was designed for operations on semi-prepared airfields. This system had actually been designed for the updated J29 fighters (esp. the A32B attack variant), but it was not introduced into series production or the Saab 29E/F conversion program. Despite these massive changes, the P29G designation was retained, and the second machine, carrying the tactical code “Röd Urban” (Red U), was quickly nicknamed “Karpen” (“Carp”), due to its characteristic new intake shape, the long fin and its stocky shape.

 

The second P29G was ready for flight tests in August 1956, just in time to support the Saab 35’s ongoing development – the aircraft, which was eventually built to meet (and exceed) the Swedish Air Force’s 1949 supersonic interceptor requirement. The modifications proved to be successful and the P29G was, fitted with a 60° sweep wing and in clean configuration, able to achieve a maximum speed of 1.367 km/h (849 mph) in level flight, a formidable achievement (vs. the 1,060 km/h (660 mph) of the late J29F and the 1200 km/h (745 mph) of the J32B interceptor) for the post WWII design.

Several wing shapes and profiles were tested, including sweep angles from 25° to 63° as well as different shapes and profiles. Even though the machines carried provisions for the J29’s standard armament, the 20 mm cannons were normally not mounted and replaced with sensors and recording equipment. However, both machines were temporarily fitted with one or two guns in order to analyze the effects of firing the weapons at supersonic speed. Underwing ordnance was also almost never carried. In some tests, though, light bombs or unguided missiles were carried and deployed, or podded cine cameras were carried.

 

While the second P29G was used for high speed trials, the first machine remained in its original guise and took over low speed handling tests. Thanks to the unique wing switch mechanism, the supersonic research program could be held within a very tight schedule and lasted until late 1959. Thereafter, the P29Gs’ potential was of little use anymore, and the engine use agreement with the USA put an end to further use of the two aircraft, so that both P29Gs were retired from service in 1960. The 1st machine, outfitted with standard J29F wings and stripped off of its engines, remained in use as an instructional air at Malmslätt air base 1969, while the second machine was mothballed. However, both airframes were eventually scrapped in 1970.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 11.66 m (38 ft 2 in) fuselage only,

13,97 m (45 ft 9 in) with pitot boom

Wingspan: varied*; 11.0 m (36 ft 1 in) with standard 25° sweep wings,

10.00 m (32 ft 9 ¾ in) with experimental 45° wings

Height: 4.54m (14 ft 10 ½ in)

Wing area: varied*; 24.15 m² (260.0 ft²) with standard 25° sweep wings

22.5 m² (242.2 ft²) with experimental 45° wings

Empty weight: 5,220 kg (11,500 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 8,510 kg (18,744 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Westinghouse J34-WE-42 turbojets, each rated at 3,400 lbf (15 kN) dry thrust

and 4,200 lbf (19 kN) with full afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1.367 km/h (849 mph) were achieved*

Range: 790 km (490 mi)

Service ceiling: up to 17,250 m (56,500 ft)*

Rate of climb: up to 45 m/s (8,850 ft/min)*

 

*Varying figures due to different tested wing configurations

 

Armament:

None installed; provisions for 4x 20mm Hispano Mark V autocannon in the lower front fuselage.

Depending on the mounted wing type, various external loads could be carried, including a wide range of light bombs, 75 mm (3 in) air-to-air rockets, 145 mm (5.8 in) anti-armor rockets, 150 mm (6 in) HE (high-explosive) rockets or 180 mm (7.2 in) HE anti-ship rockets. Due to the lack of complex wiring or fuel plumbing, no guided weapons or drop tanks could be mounted, though.

  

The kit and its assembly:

Sweden is a prolific whiffing territory, and the Saab 29 offers some interesting options. This highly modified Tunnan, which is actually rather a kitbashing than a mere model kit modification, is/was a submission to the “More or less engines” group build at whatifmodelers.com in summer 2019.

I actually had the idea of a two-engine J29 in the back of my mind for a long time, spawned by a resin conversion set for the Hasegawa B-47 Stratojet kit that came with new intakes and exhaust sections for the four engine pods. The single engine pod parts had been spent a long time ago, but the twin engine parts were still waiting for a good use. Could the exhaust fit under/into a Tunnan…?

I even had a Matchbox J29 stashed away for this experiment long ago, as well as some donor parts like the wings, and the GB eventually offered the right motivation to put those things together that no one would expect to work.

 

So I pulled out all the stuff and started – a rather straightforward affair. Work started with the fuselage, which was, together with the (very nice) cockpit assembled OOB at first, the nose filled with as much lead as possible and with the lower rear section cut away, so the B-47 resin jet nozzles would end up at the same position as the original RM2B exhaust. Due to the pen nib fairing between them, though, the profile of the modified tail became (visually) more massive, and I had to fill some gaps under the tail boom (with styrene sheet and putty). The twin engines also turned out to be wider than expected – I had hoped for straight flanks, but the fuselage shape ended up with considerable bulges behind the landing gear wells. These were created with parts from drop tank halves and blended into the rest of the lower hill with PSR work. In the same wake the area under the fin was sculpted and re-created, too.

 

At that point it became clear that I had to do more on the fuselage, esp. the front end, in order to keep the aircraft visually balance. A convenient solution became an F-100 air intake, which I grafted onto the nose instead of the original circular and round-lipped orifice – with its sharp lip the Super Sabre piece was even a plausible change! The fuselage shapes and diameters differed considerably, though, more PSR became necessary.

 

Next came the wings: I had already set apart a pair of trapezoid wings with a 45° sweep angle – these were left over from a PM Model Ta 183 conversion some time ago. With their odd shape and size they were a perfect match for my project, even more so due to the fact that I could keep the original J29 wing attachment points, I just had to shorten and modify the trailing edge area on the fuselage. The result was very conclusive.

 

With the new nose and the wings in place, the overall proportions became clearer: still tail-heavy, but not unpleasant. At this time I was also certain that I had to modify the tail surfaces. The fin was too small and did not have enough sweep for the overall look, and the stabilizer, with its thick profile, rounded edges and the single, continuous rudder did not look supersonic at all. What followed was a long search in the donor banks for suitable replacements, and I eventually came up with a MiG-15 fin (Hobby Boss) which was later clipped at the top for a less recognizable profile. The stabilizers were more challenging, though. My solution eventually became a pair of modified stabilizers from a Matchbox Buccaneer(!), attached to the MiG-15 fin.

 

The design problems did not stop here, though: the landing gear caused some more headaches. I wanted to keep the OOB parts, but especially the main legs would leave the aircraft with a very goofy look through a short wheelbase and a rear axis position too much forward. In an attempt to save the situation I attached swing arms to the OOB struts, moving the axis maybe 5mm backwards and widening the track by 2mm at the same time. Not much in total, but it helped (a little, even though the aircraft is still very tail-heavy)

 

As a final addition – since the original, wing-mounted pitots of the J29 were gone now and would not go well with the wing-switching idea – I gave the P29G a large, nose-mounted pitot and sensor boom, placed on top of the nose. This part come, like the air intake, from an F-100.

  

Painting and markings:

I tend to be conservative when it comes to liveries for what-if models, and the P29G is no exception. At first, I thought that this build could become an operational supersonic daylight interceptor (the J29G), so that I could give the model full military markings and maybe a camouflage paint scheme. However, this idea would not work: the potential real life window for such an aircraft, based on the Saab 29, would be very narrow. And aircraft development in the late Fifties made quantum leaps within a very short period of time: While the J29A entered service, work on the Mach 2 Saab 35 was already underway – nobody would have accepted (or needed) a Mach 1 fighter, based on late Forties technology, at that time anymore, and there was the all-weather Saab J32B around, too. The update program with new wings and a more powerful afterburner engine was all that could be done to exploit the Tunnan’s potential, resulting in the (real world’s) J29E and F variants.

 

I eventually decided that the J29G would only be a prototype/research aircraft, consequently called P29G, and through this decision I became more or less settled upon a NMF finish with some colorful markings. Consequently, the model was painted with various shades of metal colors, primarily Polished Aluminum Metallizer from Humbrol, but also with Humbrol 191 and Matt Aluminum Metallizer as well as ModelMaster Steel Metallizer. Around the exhaust section, I also used Revell 91 (Iron) and ModelMaster Exhaust Metallizer. Some single panels and details were painted with Revell 99 (Aluminum), and I also used generic decal material in silver to simulate some smaller access panels. Grey decal sheet was used to simulate covers for the cannon nozzles.

 

The cockpit interior was painted, according to Saab 29 standard, in a dark greenish-grey (Revell 67), and bluish grey was used inside of the landing gear wells (Revell 57). The pitot boom received black and white stripes.

 

For markings I let myself get inspired from the real world Saab 29 and 32 prototypes, which were all marked with a colored “U” tactical code on the fin and also on the front fuselage, simply meaning “Utverding” (= “Test”). I found four red decals, and I also gave the aircraft a yellow cheatline, lent from an Airfix F-86D decal sheet. The Swedish roundels come from a generic aftermarket sheet, most stencils were taken from the Revell OOB sheet and a Printscale J29 sheet.

 

Before the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish from Italeri, some grinded graphite was rubbed onto the rear fuselage, adding a metallic shine and simulating exhaust stains.

 

A thorough conversion – this has rather evolved into a kitbashing than just a kit conversion: not much from the original Matchbox J29 has been left over. But I like the outcome, even though things developed gradually from the simple idea of changing the number of engines on the Tunnan. One thing led to another. The resulting aircraft looks quite plausible, even though I am not totally happy with the landing gear, which appears to be rather far forward, despite surgical measures to mend the situation. The Ta 183 wings are a very good match, though, and I cannot help but recognize a certain French look, maybe due to the cruciform tail and the oval air intake? The P29G could also, with Argentinian marking, have become a revised version of the FMA Pulqui II?

Dornier DO-328-110

cn: 3004

ff: 23-01-1993 at Oberpfaffenhofen

 

Used as a testebed for the future Do-328s at least until 1998

 

Later broken up at Oberpfaffenhofen (OBF) where it had its first flight

 

The first visit of a Do-328 to Oslo. Fornebu, well documented by my good friend Odd Einar Lønnve, who was so kind to send me photos

 

Scanned from the photo he gave me, (RIP Odd Einar)

 

23-01-1993 D-CITI Dornier testebed

The extremely high loss rate of early F-100 Super Sabres led the USAF to request a two-seat conversion trainer, which originally had not been planned. An F-100C was returned to North American for conversion into the TF-100C, which involved extending the fuselage and the canopy slightly to provide for a second cockpit with a full set of flight controls. The crash of the only TF-100C in April 1957 did not interrupt work on the project, as the USAF had requested the two-seater be combat capable and incorporate all of the modifications made to the baseline Super Sabre. As a result, the F-100F two-seater was built from the F-100D tactical fighter bomber, and differed in performance only in the deletion of two of the four 20mm cannon; a few F-100Fs were subsequently modified to carry the AGM-12 Bullpup air-to-surface missile, while a few also had better navigational equipment than the standard Super Sabres—these aircraft were specifically intended for Pacific-based F-100 units. The F-100F entered service in January 1958.

 

The F-100F’s otherwise unremarkable career as a conversion trainer was to be changed by the Vietnam War, by two projects: the Wild Weasel suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) campaign and the Misty “fast FAC” forward air control program.

 

The Wild Weasel campaign began in response to increasing losses by USAF aircraft to North Vietnamese SA-2 Guideline (S-75 Dvina) surface-to-air missiles. Unable to attack the SAM sites before they were made operational due to Rules of Engagement restrictions, something had to be done to defend the strike forces from SAM attacks: while scoring comparatively few kills at first, the SAM sites were forcing American aircraft out of previously-safe high and medium altitudes into the murderous low-altitude North Vietnamese antiaircraft defenses. Wild Weasel was intended to not only provide early warning of SAM launches, but also to attack and destroy SAM sites and their attendant radars.

 

The F-100F was determined to be the best platform for what became known as Wild Weasel I, as it was readily available in Southeast Asia and would need a minimum of conversion. Wild Weasel I F-100Fs were equipped with a comprehensive warning and detection suite originally developed for the U-2 spyplane, allowing the Weasels to detect Fansong, Firecan, and Spin Scan guidance radars—those used by SA-2s, radar-guided antiaircraft guns, and MiG-21 fighters. The intent was that a single F-100F would lead the way into the target area accompanied by three or four F-105D Thunderchiefs, with the F-100 using rockets to mark any sites for the accompanying F-105s, or strafing the sites themselves; later, the Weasels would be equipped with AGM-45 Shrike antiradar missiles designed to destroy the radars directly. The F-100F Weasels flew their first combat mission in April 1966, and while successful, showed one shortcoming: the F-100 simply could not keep up with the F-105. Once the Thuds had dropped their ordnance, they would rapidly leave the slower F-100 behind. Moreover, the comparative low speed of the Super Sabre made it very vulnerable to the deadly air defenses around the Hanoi area. Subsequently, the USAF made the decision to withdraw the F-100F Weasels in favor of modified F-105F Wild Weasel II aircraft in late 1966.

 

The Misty FAC program—officially known as Commando Sabre—had similar origins. Prior to 1967, the antiaircraft threat in South Vietnam and southern North Vietnam was relatively low. This began to change, with a resultant spike in losses among forward air control (FAC) pilots. FACs were flying propeller-driven O-1 Birddogs and O-2 Skymasters, which were highly vulnerable to medium-altitude antiaircraft fire, especially around Mu Gia Pass, the northern “terminus” of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The USAF began looking into the “fast FAC” role, using two-seat jets. Two-seat F-105Fs were in short supply and were needed for Wild Weasels in the north; there were not yet enough F-4 Phantom IIs to go around to both strike and fighter units. The F-100F again seemed tailor made to the role, and the USAF began Project Commando Sabre in June 1967, with the unit designated as Detachment 1 of the 612th Tactical Fighter Squadron, based at Phu Cat, South Vietnam.

 

Major George “Bud” Day was put in command of Commando Sabre, due to his experience with both the F-100 and South Vietnam; Day selected the callsign “Misty” based on a song by the same name, and handpicked the crews. Each crew had to have at least 100 missions in Southeast Asia and 1000 flying hours in the F-100. Misty F-100Fs were identical to the baseline F-100F, with the only modifications being more radios to speak with strike units and a strike camera installed in the lower fuselage. While Commando Sabre was originally intended as fast FACs, Day expanded the program to include hunter-killer teams directly attacking North Vietnamese antiaircraft sites, reconnaissance, rescue force escort, and artillery spotting in the I Corps sector of South Vietnam.

 

If anything, Misty loss rates were worse than the F-100 Wild Weasels had been: 42 Misty F-100s were shot down, nearly thirty percent losses. This included Day, who was shot down and captured in August 1967; he was joined by three others in the next few years, and eight men were killed on Misty operations. Losses were so high that a Misty tour of duty was reduced to 60 missions rather than the standard 100. Once a Misty finished a tour of duty, they returned to a “safer” unit flying close air support missions. The threat level increased around Mu Gia and Ban Karai Passes until even the Mistys could no longer operate there and were replaced by F-4 Wolf FACs. The program ended in May 1970 and the surviving F-100Fs withdrawn from Vietnam.

 

Like all F-100Fs, they were allocated to Air National Guard units by 1972, and withdrawn completely by 1978, though foreign operated F-100Fs were flown until 1988, and a handful continued in civilian hands as aggressor and target-towing aircraft, operated by the Tracor Corporation, until 1998. 339 F-100Fs were built and a quarter were lost to enemy action and accidents; eleven are known to survive, with four aircraft still flyable.

 

These are two of those flyable (at least in theory) aircraft: F-100Fs N416FS and N419FS, formerly 56-3916 and 56-3971. Both seem to have nearly identical histories: they were delivered to the Royal Danish Air Force in the early 1960s, serving with either 727 or 730 Eskadrille at Skrydstrup. After the Super Sabre was retired from RDAF service, the two aircraft were bought by Tracor Flight Systems of Mojave, California in 1982; they were used as testbeds, chase aircraft, and target-towing aircraft. They were possibly the last regularly flying F-100s in service by the time they were retired in 2001. Both were subsequently acquired by Big Sky Warbirds of Bozeman, Montana, and flown there in 2003, where they remain today.

 

Getting this picture was the culmination of almost a decade of trying! Google Earth showed the aircraft parked on a taxiway of Bozeman International Airport, but I never seemed to be in a position to get there with a camera. It also looked like the aircraft were inaccessible in any case. I took a chance in September 2021, and on my way to Yellowstone, stopped by the airport. Bozeman is (as of this writing) undergoing some expansion, and the taxiway was closed. I spotted the two F-100s parked across the way instead, and finally managed to get a picture.

 

It's not the greatest angle or picture in the world, but it does show N416FS and N419FS. The former is important to my family: a good friend, Dale Fiala, flew N416FS for Tracor, and Dad built him a model, shown here: www.flickr.com/photos/31469080@N07/17912208780/in/photoli...

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In the aftermath of the Second World War, Sweden required a strong air defense, utilizing the newly developed jet propulsion technology. The original concept had been designed around a mostly straight wing, but after Swedish engineers had obtained German research data on swept-wing designs, the prototype was altered to incorporate a 25° sweep. In order to make the wing as thin as possible, Saab elected to locate the retractable undercarriage in the aircraft's fuselage rather than into the wings.

 

Extensive wind tunnel testing had also influenced aspects of the aircraft's aerodynamics, such as stability and trim across the aircraft's speed range. In order to test the design of the swept wing further and avoid any surprises, it was decided to modify a Saab Safir. It received the designation Saab 201 and a full-scale swept wing for a series of flight tests. The first 'final' sketches of the aircraft, incorporating the new information, were drawn in January 1946.

 

The originally envisioned powerplant for the new fighter type was the de Havilland Goblin turbojet engine. However, in December 1945, information on the newer and more powerful de Havilland Ghost engine became available. The new engine was deemed to be ideal for Saab's in-development aircraft, as not only did the Ghost engine had provisions for the use of a central circular air intake, the overall diameter of the engine was favorable for the planned fuselage dimensions, too. Thus, following negotiations between de Havilland and Saab, the Ghost engine was selected to power the type and built in license as the RM 2.

 

By February 1946 the main outline of the proposed aircraft had been clearly defined. In autumn 1946, following the resolution of all major questions of principal and the completion of the project specification, the Swedish Air Force formally ordered the completion of the design and that three prototype aircraft be produced, giving the proposed type the designation J 29. After a thorough test program, production of the type commenced in 1948 and, in May 1951, the first deliveries of operational production aircraft were received by F 13 Norrköping. The J 29 proved to be very successful and several variants and updates of the Tunnan were produced, including a dedicated reconnaissance variant, a two seat trainer and an all-weather fighter with an onboard radar

 

However, Sweden foresaw that there would soon be a need for a jet fighter that could intercept bombers at high altitude and also successfully engage fighters. During September 1949, the Swedish Air Force, via the Swedish Defence Material Administration, released a requirement for a cutting-edge interceptor aircraft that was envisioned to be capable of attacking hostile bomber aircraft in the transonic speed range. As released, this requirement specified a top speed of Mach speed 1.4 to 1.5. (1956, the specified speed was revised and raised to Mach 1.7-1.8, and eventually led to the Saab 35 Draken). With the barely supersonic Saab 32 Lansen just under development, and intended for different roles than being a nimble day fighter, the company searched for a way to either achieve supersonic flight through modifications of an existing type or at least gather sufficient data and develop and try the new technologies necessary to meet the 1949 requirements.

 

Since Sweden did not have a truly supersonic aircraft in its inventory (not even an experimental type), Saab decided to convert the Saab 29 into a supersonic testbed, with the outlook to develop an interim day fighter that could replace the various Tunnan fighter versions and support the new Lansen fleet until a fully capable Mach 1.5+ interceptor was ready for service. Even though the type was regarded as a pure experimental aircraft, the designation remained close to the J29 nomenclature in order to secure military funding for the project and to confuse eventual spies. Consequently, the P29 was initially presented as a new J29 version (hence the “G” suffix).

 

The P29G was based on a heavily modified production J29B airframe, which was built in two versions and only in two specimens. Work on the first airframe started in 1952, just when the first Saab 32 prototype made its maiden flight. The initial challenge consisted of integrating two relatively compact axial flow jet engines with afterburners into the fuselage, since the J29’s original RM2, even in its late afterburner variant, was not able to safely deliver the necessary thrust for the intended supersonic flight program. After long negotiations, Saab was able to procure a small number of Westinghouse J34-WE-42 turbojets from the USA, which delivered as a pair 40% more thrust than the original RM2B. The engines were only delivered under the restriction that they would exclusively be used in connection with the supersonic research program.

 

Through a thorough re-construction, the Saab team was able to mount the new engines into the lower rear fuselage, and, internally, the air intake duct had to be modified and forked behind the landing gear wells. Due to the significantly widened rear fuselage, the P29G became quickly nicknamed “Kurviga Tunnan” (= “Curvy Barrel”). Even though the widened rear fuselage increased the aircraft’s frontal cross section, the modified shape had the (unintended) effect of area ruling, a welcome side benefit which became apparent during the flight test and which largely promoted the P29G’s gain of top speed.

 

Another special and unique feature of the P29G was a special wing attachment system. It consisted of two strengthened, open box spars in the fuselage with additional attachment points along the wing roots, which allowed different wings to be switched with relatively little effort. However, due to this modification, the wing tanks (with a total capacity of 900l inside of the J29s standard wings) were lost and only 2.150l in the Saab 29’s standard fuselage tanks could be carried – but this was, for a research aircraft, not regarded as a major weakness, and compensated for the wing attachment system’s additional weight. The original wing-mounted pitots were replaced by a single, massive sensor boom attached to the aircraft’s nose above the air intake, slightly set-off to starboard in order to give the pilot an unobstructed view.

 

The first P29G's maiden flight, marked “Gul Urban” (Yellow U), took place in July 1955. The aircraft behaved normally, even though the center of gravity had markedly shifted backwards and the overall gain of weight made the aircraft slightly unstable along the longitudinal axis. During the initial, careful attempts to break the sound barrier, it soon became apparent that both the original wings as well as the original air intake shape limited the P29G's potential. In its original form, the P29G could only barely pass Mach 1 in level flight.

 

As a consequence, the second P29G, which had been under conversion from another J29B airframe since mid-1954, received more thorough modifications. The air intake was lengthened and widened, and in order to make it more effective at supersonic speed it received a sharp lip. Wind tunnel tests with the first machine led to a modified tail, too: the fin was now taller and further swept back, the stabilizer was moved to a higher position, resulting in a cruciform layout. The original single-piece stabilizer was furthermore replaced by a two-piece, all-moving construction with a 45° sweep and a thinner profile. This not only improved the aerodynamics at high speed, it also suppressed the longitudinal instability problem, even though this was never really cured.

 

Due to the even higher all-up weight of the new aircraft, the landing gear was reinforced and the 2nd P29G received an experimental suspension system on its main legs with higher spring travel, which was designed for operations on semi-prepared airfields. This system had actually been designed for the updated J29 fighters (esp. the A32B attack variant), but it was not introduced into series production or the Saab 29E/F conversion program. Despite these massive changes, the P29G designation was retained, and the second machine, carrying the tactical code “Röd Urban” (Red U), was quickly nicknamed “Karpen” (“Carp”), due to its characteristic new intake shape, the long fin and its stocky shape.

 

The second P29G was ready for flight tests in August 1956, just in time to support the Saab 35’s ongoing development – the aircraft, which was eventually built to meet (and exceed) the Swedish Air Force’s 1949 supersonic interceptor requirement. The modifications proved to be successful and the P29G was, fitted with a 60° sweep wing and in clean configuration, able to achieve a maximum speed of 1.367 km/h (849 mph) in level flight, a formidable achievement (vs. the 1,060 km/h (660 mph) of the late J29F and the 1200 km/h (745 mph) of the J32B interceptor) for the post WWII design.

Several wing shapes and profiles were tested, including sweep angles from 25° to 63° as well as different shapes and profiles. Even though the machines carried provisions for the J29’s standard armament, the 20 mm cannons were normally not mounted and replaced with sensors and recording equipment. However, both machines were temporarily fitted with one or two guns in order to analyze the effects of firing the weapons at supersonic speed. Underwing ordnance was also almost never carried. In some tests, though, light bombs or unguided missiles were carried and deployed, or podded cine cameras were carried.

 

While the second P29G was used for high speed trials, the first machine remained in its original guise and took over low speed handling tests. Thanks to the unique wing switch mechanism, the supersonic research program could be held within a very tight schedule and lasted until late 1959. Thereafter, the P29Gs’ potential was of little use anymore, and the engine use agreement with the USA put an end to further use of the two aircraft, so that both P29Gs were retired from service in 1960. The 1st machine, outfitted with standard J29F wings and stripped off of its engines, remained in use as an instructional air at Malmslätt air base 1969, while the second machine was mothballed. However, both airframes were eventually scrapped in 1970.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 11.66 m (38 ft 2 in) fuselage only,

13,97 m (45 ft 9 in) with pitot boom

Wingspan: varied*; 11.0 m (36 ft 1 in) with standard 25° sweep wings,

10.00 m (32 ft 9 ¾ in) with experimental 45° wings

Height: 4.54m (14 ft 10 ½ in)

Wing area: varied*; 24.15 m² (260.0 ft²) with standard 25° sweep wings

22.5 m² (242.2 ft²) with experimental 45° wings

Empty weight: 5,220 kg (11,500 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 8,510 kg (18,744 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Westinghouse J34-WE-42 turbojets, each rated at 3,400 lbf (15 kN) dry thrust

and 4,200 lbf (19 kN) with full afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1.367 km/h (849 mph) were achieved*

Range: 790 km (490 mi)

Service ceiling: up to 17,250 m (56,500 ft)*

Rate of climb: up to 45 m/s (8,850 ft/min)*

 

*Varying figures due to different tested wing configurations

 

Armament:

None installed; provisions for 4x 20mm Hispano Mark V autocannon in the lower front fuselage.

Depending on the mounted wing type, various external loads could be carried, including a wide range of light bombs, 75 mm (3 in) air-to-air rockets, 145 mm (5.8 in) anti-armor rockets, 150 mm (6 in) HE (high-explosive) rockets or 180 mm (7.2 in) HE anti-ship rockets. Due to the lack of complex wiring or fuel plumbing, no guided weapons or drop tanks could be mounted, though.

  

The kit and its assembly:

Sweden is a prolific whiffing territory, and the Saab 29 offers some interesting options. This highly modified Tunnan, which is actually rather a kitbashing than a mere model kit modification, is/was a submission to the “More or less engines” group build at whatifmodelers.com in summer 2019.

I actually had the idea of a two-engine J29 in the back of my mind for a long time, spawned by a resin conversion set for the Hasegawa B-47 Stratojet kit that came with new intakes and exhaust sections for the four engine pods. The single engine pod parts had been spent a long time ago, but the twin engine parts were still waiting for a good use. Could the exhaust fit under/into a Tunnan…?

I even had a Matchbox J29 stashed away for this experiment long ago, as well as some donor parts like the wings, and the GB eventually offered the right motivation to put those things together that no one would expect to work.

 

So I pulled out all the stuff and started – a rather straightforward affair. Work started with the fuselage, which was, together with the (very nice) cockpit assembled OOB at first, the nose filled with as much lead as possible and with the lower rear section cut away, so the B-47 resin jet nozzles would end up at the same position as the original RM2B exhaust. Due to the pen nib fairing between them, though, the profile of the modified tail became (visually) more massive, and I had to fill some gaps under the tail boom (with styrene sheet and putty). The twin engines also turned out to be wider than expected – I had hoped for straight flanks, but the fuselage shape ended up with considerable bulges behind the landing gear wells. These were created with parts from drop tank halves and blended into the rest of the lower hill with PSR work. In the same wake the area under the fin was sculpted and re-created, too.

 

At that point it became clear that I had to do more on the fuselage, esp. the front end, in order to keep the aircraft visually balance. A convenient solution became an F-100 air intake, which I grafted onto the nose instead of the original circular and round-lipped orifice – with its sharp lip the Super Sabre piece was even a plausible change! The fuselage shapes and diameters differed considerably, though, more PSR became necessary.

 

Next came the wings: I had already set apart a pair of trapezoid wings with a 45° sweep angle – these were left over from a PM Model Ta 183 conversion some time ago. With their odd shape and size they were a perfect match for my project, even more so due to the fact that I could keep the original J29 wing attachment points, I just had to shorten and modify the trailing edge area on the fuselage. The result was very conclusive.

 

With the new nose and the wings in place, the overall proportions became clearer: still tail-heavy, but not unpleasant. At this time I was also certain that I had to modify the tail surfaces. The fin was too small and did not have enough sweep for the overall look, and the stabilizer, with its thick profile, rounded edges and the single, continuous rudder did not look supersonic at all. What followed was a long search in the donor banks for suitable replacements, and I eventually came up with a MiG-15 fin (Hobby Boss) which was later clipped at the top for a less recognizable profile. The stabilizers were more challenging, though. My solution eventually became a pair of modified stabilizers from a Matchbox Buccaneer(!), attached to the MiG-15 fin.

 

The design problems did not stop here, though: the landing gear caused some more headaches. I wanted to keep the OOB parts, but especially the main legs would leave the aircraft with a very goofy look through a short wheelbase and a rear axis position too much forward. In an attempt to save the situation I attached swing arms to the OOB struts, moving the axis maybe 5mm backwards and widening the track by 2mm at the same time. Not much in total, but it helped (a little, even though the aircraft is still very tail-heavy)

 

As a final addition – since the original, wing-mounted pitots of the J29 were gone now and would not go well with the wing-switching idea – I gave the P29G a large, nose-mounted pitot and sensor boom, placed on top of the nose. This part come, like the air intake, from an F-100.

  

Painting and markings:

I tend to be conservative when it comes to liveries for what-if models, and the P29G is no exception. At first, I thought that this build could become an operational supersonic daylight interceptor (the J29G), so that I could give the model full military markings and maybe a camouflage paint scheme. However, this idea would not work: the potential real life window for such an aircraft, based on the Saab 29, would be very narrow. And aircraft development in the late Fifties made quantum leaps within a very short period of time: While the J29A entered service, work on the Mach 2 Saab 35 was already underway – nobody would have accepted (or needed) a Mach 1 fighter, based on late Forties technology, at that time anymore, and there was the all-weather Saab J32B around, too. The update program with new wings and a more powerful afterburner engine was all that could be done to exploit the Tunnan’s potential, resulting in the (real world’s) J29E and F variants.

 

I eventually decided that the J29G would only be a prototype/research aircraft, consequently called P29G, and through this decision I became more or less settled upon a NMF finish with some colorful markings. Consequently, the model was painted with various shades of metal colors, primarily Polished Aluminum Metallizer from Humbrol, but also with Humbrol 191 and Matt Aluminum Metallizer as well as ModelMaster Steel Metallizer. Around the exhaust section, I also used Revell 91 (Iron) and ModelMaster Exhaust Metallizer. Some single panels and details were painted with Revell 99 (Aluminum), and I also used generic decal material in silver to simulate some smaller access panels. Grey decal sheet was used to simulate covers for the cannon nozzles.

 

The cockpit interior was painted, according to Saab 29 standard, in a dark greenish-grey (Revell 67), and bluish grey was used inside of the landing gear wells (Revell 57). The pitot boom received black and white stripes.

 

For markings I let myself get inspired from the real world Saab 29 and 32 prototypes, which were all marked with a colored “U” tactical code on the fin and also on the front fuselage, simply meaning “Utverding” (= “Test”). I found four red decals, and I also gave the aircraft a yellow cheatline, lent from an Airfix F-86D decal sheet. The Swedish roundels come from a generic aftermarket sheet, most stencils were taken from the Revell OOB sheet and a Printscale J29 sheet.

 

Before the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish from Italeri, some grinded graphite was rubbed onto the rear fuselage, adding a metallic shine and simulating exhaust stains.

 

A thorough conversion – this has rather evolved into a kitbashing than just a kit conversion: not much from the original Matchbox J29 has been left over. But I like the outcome, even though things developed gradually from the simple idea of changing the number of engines on the Tunnan. One thing led to another. The resulting aircraft looks quite plausible, even though I am not totally happy with the landing gear, which appears to be rather far forward, despite surgical measures to mend the situation. The Ta 183 wings are a very good match, though, and I cannot help but recognize a certain French look, maybe due to the cruciform tail and the oval air intake? The P29G could also, with Argentinian marking, have become a revised version of the FMA Pulqui II?

McDonnell Douglas DC-9-21

cn: 47308 / ln: 474

ff: 14-03-1969

 

31-03-1969 OY-KGF SAS -Scandinavian Arilines System, "Rolf Viking", config Y85

 

One of ten DC-9-21s ordered to replace CV-440s on domestic services .

 

17-07-1980 OY-KGF was leased to Itavia for three months

 

24-10-1980 OY-KGF SAS returned, Rolf Viking, reconfig CY75

 

late 1984 or early 1985 OY-KGF was repaitned to the new white SAS colours, still "Rolf Viking" and config CY75

 

15-08-2000 wfu and stored at OSL after flying 30 years for SAS

 

Which means I photographed it 6 days after wfu from service, ouside the SAS Hangar

 

17-11-2000 F-WVTH Thomson CSF (Testbed)

02-03-2003 F-GVTH Thales (Testbed)

 

2010 preserved at Bordaeaux (LFBD/BOD)

 

Scanned from original slide

Airbus A380-841

MSN 001

F-WWOW '001 GD' [Prototype/Rolls-Royce Trent testbed]

 

Airbus S.A.S.

  

Copyright © 2014 A380spotter. All rights reserved.

ex BAE SYSTEMS flying test bed Jetstream G-BWWW at Cranfield. Not sure if she's active any more or has been retired. Has lost her BAE SYSTEMS titles..

Prestwick August 1984. Scanned from my father's slide. Copyright Jim Cain.

 

At this time "Treble Whisky" was operated by Distillers as a corporate aircraft.

 

It returned to BAe in 1986 and has since operated as a testbed for unmanned automated flight. It is still active today.

Yes I know it's a GP40, but it's being used as a testbed for some sound files. The CAT HEP generator kicks in after about 10 seconds using F22.

After arrival from Basingstoke on the shuttle service, First Great Western owned Class 150 prototype, 150001, awaits the return working from Reading.

 

The original prototype Class 150's date back to 1984, when British Rail was considering a new fleet of Diesel Multiple Units to replace ageing 1st Generation DMU's in years following the creation of the Regional Railways sector. Three types of units were considered, the Class 150 built by BREL, the Class 151 built by Metro-Cammel and the Class 155 built by British Leyland. The two prototypes were also testbeds for new unit engines, 150001 being fitted with a Cummins engine that was fitted to the production fleet, whilst 150002 was fitted with a Rolls Royce engine, but this was later changed to a standard Cummins engine. Eventually the Class 150's and 155's were chosen as the main fleet of units for the local and provincial routes, the 155's later being split up to form the single-car Class 153's.

 

Following the successful tests of these units, the two prototype Class 150's went into service in the West Midlands, operating for the Centro brand around Birmingham. These units have very few distinguishing features to the production fleet of Class 150/1's, aside from the fact that these units are formed of three coaches, including an intermediate trailer. The remainder of the Class 150 fleet was built as only two cars, although in recent years hybrid 3-car Class 150's have been made using single Class 150/2 carriages as intermediate trailers.

 

In 2011, the introduction of the Class 172's resulted in a mass withdrawal of Class 150's from the West Midlands, and thus the prototype Class 150's were taken on along with many other ex-Central Trains and London Midland units by First Great Western. This particular outing for this unit is abnormal as the two prototype units are employed in working the Basingstoke to Reading shuttle service in lieu of a Class 165 'Thames Turbo' unit.

Once the fastest production car in the world, the Jaguar XK120 was Jaguar's first new product following the end of the war, being designed in those dark final days of the conflict and being developed over the next three years, making its début in 1948.

 

The XK120 was launched in open two-seater form at the 1948 London Motor Show as a testbed and show car for the new Jaguar XK engine. The display car was the first prototype, chassis number 670001. It looked almost identical to the production cars except that the straight outer pillars of its windscreen would be curved on the production version. The roadster caused a sensation, which persuaded Jaguar founder and design boss William Lyons to put it into production.

 

Beginning in 1948, the first 242 cars wore wood-framed open 2-seater bodies with aluminium panels. Production switched to the 112lb heavier all-steel in early 1950. The "120" in the name referred to the aluminium car's 120 mph top speed, which made it the world's fastest production car at the time of its launch. Engine models ranged from a 160bhp DOHC Straight-6 Double SU H6 low end model, to the fastest version which was powered by a 210bhp DOHC Straight-6 Double SU H8, giving the car a top speed of 124mph, which in 1949 was a spectacular feat when compared to the Austins and Morris' of the time.

 

On 30 May 1949, on the empty Ostend-Jabbeke motorway in Belgium, a prototype XK120 timed by the officials of the Royal Automobile Club of Belgium achieved an average of runs in opposing directions of 132.6 mph with the windscreen replaced by just one small aeroscreen and a catalogued alternative top gear ratio, and 135 mph with a passenger-side tonneau cover in place. In 1950 and 1951, at a banked oval track in France, XK120 roadsters averaged over 100 mph for 24 hours and over 130 mph for an hour, and in 1952 a fixed-head coupé took numerous world records for speed and distance when it averaged 100 mph for a week.

 

The Motor magazine road-tested an XK120 roadster in November 1949. This pre-production car, chassis number 670001, road-registered as HKV 455, was the first prototype built. It was also the 1948 London Motor Show display model, and had been driven by Prince Bira in the 1949 Silverstone Production Car Race. The magazine reported a top speed of 124.6 mph, acceleration from 0–60 mph in 10.0 seconds and fuel consumption of 19.8 miles per imperial gallon. The car as tested cost £1263 including taxes.

 

In 1949 the first production roadster, chassis number 670003, was delivered to famous actor Clark Gable.

 

The XK120 was ultimately available in two open versions, first as an open 2-seater described in the US market as the roadster, then also as a drophead coupé from 1953; and also as a closed, or fixed head coupé from 1951.

 

Production of the car ended in 1954 after 12,055 examples were constructed, being replaced by the Jaguar XK140. Today you'd be hard pressed to find XK120's on a regular basis, but if you attend car shows like me you'd be likely to find at least one show up.

 

Most notably though, the car returned to the centre stage of modern motoring through a spectacularly organised and choreographed race between the presenters of Top Gear on their Race to the North, a competition set in a hypothetical 1949 between the primary modes of transport at the time, with James May in the Jaguar XK120, Richard Hammond on a Vincent Blackshadow motorbike, and Jeremy Clarkson on the rebuilt Peppercorn A1 Pacific number 60163 'Tornado'.

Airbus A380-861

MSN 004 [Engine Alliance testbed]

F-WWDD 'VNO' ['#A380' 'iflyA380.com' decals]

 

iflya380.com/

 

Airbus S.A.S.

 

Copyright © 2016 A380spotter. All rights reserved.

  

www.farnborough.com

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.

 

The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.

 

The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.

 

The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.

Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.

 

The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.

 

At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.

 

The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.

One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.

All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.

The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.

 

The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.

 

Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.

 

For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)

Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)

Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,

5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight

Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks

Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)

Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)

Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…

2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks

or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…

2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)

machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.

 

I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.

 

The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?

 

The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.

 

Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.

 

The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.

 

The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.

After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.

Under tow to Stand 6 following respray. Due to be the 'Excalibur' testbed for the BAE Systems Tempest. Later departed to MoD Boscombe Down (EGDM). Ex G-POWH.

 

Operator: 2Excel Aviation

 

Aircraft: Boeing 757-256

 

Registration: G-FTAI

 

Callsign: Broadsword 25 // BRO25

 

Location: Norwich (NWI / EGSH)

UP 6938 is an EMD DDA40X locomotive on display in front of Jenks Shop at the Union Pacific facility in North Little Rock, Arkansas.

 

The EMD DDA40X is a 6,600 HP D-D locomotive, built from 1969 to 1971 exclusively for the Union Pacific Railroad. It is the most powerful diesel-electric locomotive model ever built on a single frame, having two 16-645E3A diesel prime movers.

 

The first DDA40X, UP 6900, was delivered in April 1969, in time to participate in the celebrations of the centennial anniversary of the completion of the First Transcontinental Railroad driving the "Gold Spike Limited"; it arrived in Salt Lake City, Utah, on the morning of May 10, 1969. In honor of this, the class was nicknamed "Centennials" and the choice of locomotive numbers in the 6900s was made for the same reason. Forty-six more were built between June 1969 and September 1971, numbered from 6901 to 6946.

 

The DDA40X is 98 ft (30 m) long. The frames were fabricated by the John Mohr Company of Chicago, because they were too large for EMD's factory. The "X" in the model number stood for experimental, as DDA40X Centennials were testbeds for technology that would go into future EMD products. UP frequently used these locomotives to haul heavy freights. Each unit successfully ran about two million miles (3,200,000 km) before they were retired from revenue service in 1985.

Airbus A380-861

MSN 004 [Engine Alliance testbed]

F-WWDD 'VNO' ['#A380' 'iflyA380.com' decals]

 

iflya380.com/

 

Airbus S.A.S.

 

Copyright © 2016 A380spotter. All rights reserved.

  

www.farnborough.com

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.

 

The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.

 

The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.

 

The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.

Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.

 

The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.

 

At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.

 

The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.

One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.

All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.

The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.

 

The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.

 

Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.

 

For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)

Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)

Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,

5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight

Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks

Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)

Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)

Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…

2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks

or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…

2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)

machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.

 

I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.

 

The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?

 

The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.

 

Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.

 

The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.

 

The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.

After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.

53-2418 McDonnell NF-101A Voodoo USAF Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum McMinnville 12 November 2017. Was loaned to General Electric as a testbed for the J-79 engine.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.

 

The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.

 

The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.

 

The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.

Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.

 

The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.

 

At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.

 

The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.

One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.

All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.

The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.

 

The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.

 

Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.

 

For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)

Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)

Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,

5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight

Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks

Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)

Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)

Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…

2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks

or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…

2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)

machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.

 

I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.

 

The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?

 

The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.

 

Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.

 

The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.

 

The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.

After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.

YF-16B.

6510 TW / 6516 TS.

Edwards AFB, California,

AFFTC.

July 1982.

 

On display at Air Force Flight Test Center Museum Airpark, Edwards AFB, CA.

This was the 25th 747 built, delivered to Pan Am in March 1970. It was sold to GE in March 1992 and used as an engine testbed until 1/25/2017 when it was finally retired at 19,251 cycles and 90,000 hours.

Airbus A350-941 [A350 XWB™]

MSN 0002

F-WWCF '002' [Second prototype]

 

A380-861

MSN 004 [Engine Alliance testbed]

F-WWDD 'VNO' ['#A380' 'iflyA380.com' decals]

 

Airbus S.A.S.

 

Copyright © 2016 A380spotter. All rights reserved.

  

www.farnborough.com

Unique Class 47 that was used as a testbed for Class 56 and Class 58 power units. Seen awaiting its next turn of duty at Westbury shed.

Its conversion from 47046 happened during accident repairs in the mid 70s, initially renumbered 47601 in 1975 then as 47901 in 1979. It was scrapped in 1992.

© Dave Bower

RAF - abandoned airfield equipment

Yes! Honest to God, yes! After years of searching I have found myself one of the rarest and most strangest cars you ever did see!

 

What you're looking at here is the Rolls Royce Camargue, very much the Rolls Royce that time forgot. What can you even say about it? It's one of the most iconic automotive failures in history, and certainly a car that Rolls Royce fans are always very quick to wince at when I mention it at RREC conventions.

 

So where did this curious car come from? To truly understand this mighty machine you need to go back to 1969, where a massive change in the image and style of the world was starting to hold sway. In the world of autos, the curvature of the 1950's and early 60's was giving way to the angles of the 1970's, the decade that gave us the 'Wedge' sportsers and boxy saloon cars.

 

Rolls Royce, who at this point were building three cars, the Phantom VI, the Silver Shadow, and the Silver Shadow Two-Door Saloon (later to be known as the Corniche), were looking for a new design that would drastically alter its image from that of the Shadow. Originally, the intention was to use their new brainchild to replace the Two-Door Saloon, but due to financial difficulty within the Rolls Royce company, later followed by bankruptcy after the RB211 Jet Engine project, the company chose instead to save costs and rebrand it as the Corniche instead.

 

For their new car, Rolls Royce chose not to have it designed in-house like previous models, but went for the first time to Pininfarina of Italy. Throughout the remainder of 1969 the company toyed with many sketches, until in 1970 a final design was chosen and given the go by the Rolls Royce management, with the intention for a launch in either late 1972 or early 1973. Within the company, the project was dubbed "Delta", but was later changed to DY20, with ‘D’ signifying Delta, ‘Y’ signifying it was based on the SY (Silver Shadow) platform, and '20' shortened from 120 which was the car’s wheelbase of 120 inches.

 

But as mentioned, following the amount of money poured into the new Rolls Royce RB211 Jet Engine Project for the Lockheed Tristar, the company was bankrupt as of the 4th February 1971. The result was that the Motor Car Division, whose future now rested in the hands of the Official Receiver, had to look closely at all aspects of the business. This led to the splitting of the Rolls Royce company, with Rolls Royce Motors Ltd. being founded and placed under the ownership of Vickers, whilst the bankrupt Rolls Royce Ltd. was nationalised.

 

During this turbulent period, the DY20 project was closely scrutinised and the Receiver gave the go-ahead to commence the project, but following a critical review of the engineering specification for the car, a decision was taken to delay the launch date until 1975.

 

With development continuing, HJ Mulliner Park Ward, who already built the bodies for the Corniche, were chosen to manufacture the bodies of the DY20 project. In the summer of 1972, the first prototype D1 was released and tested heavily to maintain the standard of reliable excellence that Rolls Royce had been known for. At first the car's initial reception was warm, with people noting that it looked far more futuristic than the Shadow on which it was heavily based. Aside from sharing the same running gear, platform, Rolls Royce V8 engine and a majority of the internal features as the Shadow, the car was endearing in that it was fitted with a new and highly sophisticated bi-level automatic air conditioning system that at that time was the very first car in the world to have such a unit fitted. It was declared that this feature alone was more expensive than a British Leyland Mini! Another change was an instrument board, which many commented wouldn't have looked out of place on the flight deck of a Boeing 747!

 

Throughout 1972 and 73 more prototypes continued to be released and tested, with Rolls Royce giving paramount assistance to HJ Mulliner Park Ward's staff as they rigorously put these cars together. On the 18 January 1973 the body of the first production prototype, assigned D3, was attached to the front and rear sub frame assemblies on the normal Silver Shadow production line with maximum security in place and, following the production line assembly, the car was delivered to the experimental department to begin a period of intensive development work.

 

From May 1973 and all through 1974 production increased but still subject to extreme security. The production sequence was shared between MPW and Crewe. Once the body had been produced in the London factory and despatched to Crewe it was ‘finished painted’, attached to the front and rear sub frames and sent in a part built state back to MPW for all trim, general finishing and testing to take place at Hythe Road.

 

In January 1975, the car was officially launched in Catania, Sicily, and christened the name Camargue, an area situated in the delta of the River Rhône in France. Following a very successful press launch, the car was unveiled to the world on 5 March 1975 and the price quoted was £29,250, which made it the most expensive production car in the world ever at that time. Today, this figure translates out to £272,000. To put the price in perspective with other Rolls-Royce models at the time the Corniche saloon car cost £19,013 and the “Flagship of the Fleet” Phantom VI only cost £21,352!

 

The car was launched in the United States a year later after delays in fitting the cars with US Specification running gear meant that production didn't begin until August 1975. The cost of these cars in the US was $147,000, which today is about $588,000.

 

So, after a turbulent development mired in bankruptcy, a complicated building strategy and a delayed launch in America, did Rolls Royce's gamble with an audaciously designed car pay off?

 

Not in the slightest!

 

Purists recoiled at the sight of the angular corners and straight lines, with its big round headlights and chunky panels that made it look less like a Rolls Royce and more like a Lincoln Continental. They argued that for much, much less, owners could buy a Corniche or a Shadow which looked twice as good and performed just as well. This was then added to by the fuel crisis of the late 1970's, upon which that 6.75L Rolls Royce V8 soaking up petrol at a gallon every 15 miles looked deeply undesirable.

 

In all, only 531 of these cars were ever produced during its 11 year lifetime, but with a few variations. In 1985 a specialist hunting car called the Sbarro was reengineered for an Arabian aristocrat, whilst in 1979 two Camargues were used as testbeds for developments that would later find their way into the Silver Spirit/Spur range, including headlights and other features. In 1985 a single Bentley Camargue was also built, identical except for the changed badge and Grille, although many aftermarket conversions are known to exist. The last two cars rolled off the production line on Christmas Eve 1986 bound for Japan, at a price of £83,000.

 

Today, the Rolls Royce Camargue is a very, very rare car, and you would be hard pressed to find them routinely. In the United States a few continue to roam the countryside, with around 200 of the cars being exported there. Reception of these cars sadly continues to be very critical, with the car often topping people's lists for worst car ever made or ugliest car ever made. Although James May is one of a few people who defend this car, dubbing it "like that pug-faced but well-dressed bloke down the pub", for the most part all people can do is laugh at this car, laugh for the fact that it didn't sell, didn't look good and went through so much trouble to design and build that it was just a rushed embarrassment for the Rolls Royce company.

 

The reputation of these cars is so bad that in spite of its rarity, owners can't even give these things away, with most that I've seen going for as little as £20,000. But a word of advice, stop laughing, and buy their car! £20,000 for a two-door luxury saloon, a pedigree Rolls Royce, and one that once held the distinction of being the world's most expensive production car, you not only get this car for the cost of an equivalent Ford or Vauxhall, but you also make a saving on the original price tag of £252,000, that's over a quarter of a million pounds!

 

Me personally, I absolutely adore these cars! Indeed they're not as pretty as other Rollers, but I consider this a car that you not only have to feel sorry for, considering the background troubles that trailed its development from the start, but one that you have to admire as well. I feel that it's a car that's stood the test of time, a bit of automotive history from the 1970's that shows how reckless and ambitious we were with our car construction, like the Aston Martin Lagonda, brash in the extreme, but lovable all the same.

 

In fact if I had £20,000 right now I'd gladly go out and buy one, not only because I'd be saving a fortune, but also because it's a very personable little car, the kind of car you can't take your eyes off of, the car you could really give a name and love forever.

 

I'd name mine Christie! :D

NASA Dryden's F-15B Research Test bed roared aloft from the Edwards AFB main runway for a Supersonic Boundary Layer Transition - Phase II, or SBLT-II, research flight. The experiment, being conducted in partnership with Aerion Corporation, involved flying a small Aerion-designed test airfoil attached underneath the F-15B to investigate the extent and robustness of natural laminar flow over the test section at supersonic speeds.

  

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center’s F-15B Research Testbed aircraft has been busy this spring, flying an experimental test fixture in partnership with Aerion Corporation of Reno, Nevada.

 

Called the Supersonic Boundary Layer Transition, Phase II, or SBLT-II, the experiment consists of flying a small test airfoil, or wing section, attached underneath the F-15B. This allows NASA and Aerion engineers to continue investigating the extent and robustness of natural laminar flow over the test section at supersonic speeds.

 

Conducting the experiment in actual supersonic flight conditions with the F-15B enables engineers to capture data in a real-world flight environment, allowing for more precise refining of supersonic natural laminar flow airfoil design.

 

“The objective of the flight series is to investigate the extent and robustness of smooth, or laminar, airflow over the specially-designed test airfoil,” said Brett Pauer, NASA Dryden’s deputy High Speed Project manager. “Then, researchers will work to better understand when imperfections in the airfoil’s surface cause the air to transition from laminar to rough, turbulent flow. The greater the extent of laminar airflow over a wing, the less aerodynamic drag there is, which reduces fuel consumption,” Pauer said.

 

It is believed that significant laminar flow has never been achieved on any production supersonic aircraft before, so this research and the data being collected from the SBLT-II test fixture may help provide some of the data that might enable the design of supersonic aircraft in the future that have wings that produce laminar flow at supersonic cruise conditions.

 

One of the goals of NASA’s High Speed Project, which utilizes the F-15B and other high performance jets, is reducing the fuel consumption and increasing efficiency of future supersonic aircraft.

 

Project flights of the SBLT-II experiment began on the F-15B earlier this year. So far, four data-gathering flights have been flown, with six more planned.

Looking north along the footpath and cycleway which has been built on the trackbed of the former single track railway branch line which ran between Lanacster Castle & Green Ayre Stations until its closure in 1966.

 

The line was included the Midland Railway's pioneering electrification scheme of 1908 which provided an efficient rapid transit network between Lancaster, Morecambe & Heysham which used an overhead power supply at 6.6kV AC at 25Hz though changed to the U.K. standard 50Hz cycle in the early 1950s when the system was upgraded as a testbed for future main line electrification schemes in the U.K.

Experimental, prototype testbed battery electric Alexander Dennis Enviro200 at Hatfield

Engineers at Ball Aerospace test the Wavefront Sensing and Control testbed to ensure that the 18 primary mirror segments and one secondary mirror on JWST work as one. The test is performed on a 1/6 scale model of the JWST mirrors.

 

Credit: NASA/Northrop Grumman/Ball Aerospace

 

To read more about the James Webb Space Telescope go to: www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/partnerships.html

 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is home to the nation's largest organization of combined scientists, engineers and technologists that build spacecraft, instruments and new technology to study the Earth, the sun, our solar system, and the universe.

Boeing 747-267B

1 2 ••• 22 23 25 27 28 ••• 79 80