View allAll Photos Tagged Testbed
In 1972 Volvo Presented its rolling safety laboratory, the VESC. It was meant to work as both an experimental vehicle and as a testbed for future safety features, such as anti-lock brakes, airbags and telescopic action bumpers. The front end of the car remained almost unchanged into the 240/260 models of 1974. Technical features based on the 140 series.
Volvo Museum
Arendals Skans
405 08 Göteborg
Sweden
July 2012
Handley Page HP.115 XP841 on display appropriately under Concorde 002's wing at the Fleet Air Arm Museum, Yeovilton.
The HP.115 was a testbed aircraft built in the early 1960's as part of the research programme to develop a supersonic transport (SST) aircraft which would eventually evolve into Concorde. It was designed specifically to test the low speed handling characteristics of the tailless delta wing configuration chosen for the SST.
The sole aircraft, XP841 flew for the first time in August 1961 from Royal Aircraft Establishment Bedford. It continued in service with the RAE through to 1974, providing useful data relating to low speed operations with the delta wing, particularly on takeoff and landing. In 1964 it was joined in the Concorde development programme by the BAC 221 (modified Fairy Delta 2) which was used for high speed research.
The HP.115 was powered by a single Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet and featured a 75 degree sweep delta wing with planform and aerofoil section representative of that expected to be used for the future SST. It also had a fixed landing gear. The u-shaped pipe over the wing leading edge is the outlet from the smoke generator, which allowed airflow over the wing to be observed.
For many years the District Railway, officially entitled the Metropolitan District Railway and that was promoted to complete what is now the Circle line of the Lonodn Underground thus 'matching' the northern section constructed and operated by the Metropolitan Railway, oversaw the issue of various maps of the Metropolis that were offered for public sale. These, needless to say, heavily promoted the company's lines and services as well as other railways and omnibus lines operated 'in connection' with their services - often in quite wilful ignorance of alternatives!
This, from 1903, shows some still familiar District line services along with sections of lines that have seen services withdrawn, transferred or indeed closed such as the services beyond Addison Road (Olympia) towards Latimer Road via Uxbridge Rd station. This issue also shows the original layout of lines around Hounslow, subsequently altered as well as now being part of the Piccadilly line as well as the Uxbridge section, beyond South Harrow, that was under construction and that the MDR would eventually run under powers obtained to have right of use of the Metropolitan's Uxbridge extension that would open in 1904.In fact the section of line running off from Mill Hill Park (now Acton Town) through the largely open fields of Middlesex was to be the testbed in these years for the four-rail electrification system adopted for the wider London Underground system following the purchase of the MDR by American interests to assist in the development of deep tube lines and the infusion of US finance and know-how. The reverse of the map shows various announcements and tables of services and fares. This includes the famous and long-standing through trains from stations on the District direct to Southend on Sea via the London, Tilbury & Southern Railway.
This map would have been priced a half-penny had it been sold but it appears, as was quite common, slightly cropped and folded tipped into a 1903 Black's Guide Book to "Around London".
Boeing 747-446 ( 26355 / 1024 )
General Electric Testbed . Ex JA8910 Japan Airlines ( delivered 29.3.94 ) , first flight 7.3.94 , delivered 30.12.10 ( to G.E. as N356AS , re-registered to N747GF on 2.11.11 ) . Morning arrival on runway 06 for the Airshow .
In 1972 Volvo Presented its rolling safety laboratory, the VESC. It was meant to work as both an experimental vehicle and as a testbed for future safety features, such as anti-lock brakes, airbags and telescopic action bumpers. The front end of the car remained almost unchanged into the 240/260 models of 1974. Technical features based on the 140 series.
Volvo Museum
Arendals Skans
405 08 Göteborg
Sweden
July 2012
Row 44 is a Westlake Village, California-based company providing in-flight broadband connectivity for the passengers, cockpit and crew of commercial aircraft.
So why an Albatros testbed? Row 44 discovered that the curvature atop the fuselage is the same as the top of a Boeing 737.
XV Patrick Blackett (X01) is an experimental ship used by the Royal Navy as a testbed for new technologies, including unmanned underwater vehicles and unmanned surface vehicles.
Her namesake is Patrick Blackett, a Royal Navy veteran and Nobel Prize-winning British physicist.
The Ship has her own QR Code
Pictured here arriving at Portsmouth Naval Base, where the ship is currently based
10/2014 - La Grange, IL
EMDX 92 (former SD89MAC) testbed sitting outside the EMD plant.
If you're going to attempt this photo, be quick and don't step foot on their grass. EMD and their security are not the slightest bit railfan-friendly.
Boeing 737-297(Adv) cn: 21740 / ln/ 562 ff: 15-03-1979
N70724 Aloha Airlines 29-03-1979 "Queen Kapiolani"
N70724 Pan Am (leased) 22-09-1983 "Clipper Spreeathen"
N70724 Aloha Airlines 29-07-1988 returned
4X-AOT IAI ELTA Electronics Radar Testbed 15-09-1995
std TLV 2013
Scanned from original negativ film, seen arriving on route opening from LHR.
+++ 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.
Culprit: www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCE4efjHIVM
At this point I'm pretty much just using the model as a testbed. Finished never, etc.
Airbus A380-861
MSN 004 [Engine Alliance testbed]
F-WWDD 'VNO' ['#A380' 'iflyA380.com' decals]
Airbus S.A.S.
Copyright © 2016 A380spotter. All rights reserved.
+++ 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 Folland 150 was directly inspired by the (modest) successes experienced by the Saro SR./A.1, a jet-powered flying boat fighter that went through trials in the late 1940ies.
The project had been kicked-off in the end phase of the 2nd World War, when the Imperial Japanese Navy with seaplane fighters such as the Nakajima A6M2-N (an adaptation of the Mitsubishi Zero) and the Kawanishi N1K demonstrated the effectiveness of a fighter seaplane.
In theory, seaplanes were ideally suited to conditions in the Pacific theatre, and could turn any relatively calm area of coast into an airbase. Their main disadvantage came from the way in which the bulk of their floatation gear penalized their performance compared to other fighters.
The new jet engines offered more power and aerodynamically cleaner designs, and the Saro SR./A.1 proved the soundness of the concept. But while the Saro SR./A.1 proved to have good performance and handling, the need for such aircraft had completely evaporated with the end of the war. Furthermore, the success of the aircraft carrier in the Pacific had demonstrated a far more effective way to project airpower over the oceans. The project was suspended and the prototype put into storage in 1950, but it was briefly resurrected in November 1950 owing to the outbreak of the Korean War, before realization of its obsolescence compared with land-based fighters, the prototype last flying in June 1951.
Anyway, this was not the end of the jet-powered flying boat fighter. After the Korean War, Saunders-Roe came up with a design called the "Saunders Roe Hydroski" (reminiscent of the Convair F2Y Sea Dart) to improve the performance closer to land-based aircraft but "received no official support". Other ship-based fighter concepts were developed and proposed, too. In the early Fifties, Folland made several proposals based on its newly developed light fighter, which would evolve into the Gnat.
The Gnat was the creation of WEW "Teddy" Petter, a British aircraft designer formerly of Westland Aircraft and English Electric. It was designed to meet the 1952 Operational Requirement OR.303 calling for a lightweight fighter. Petter believed that a small, simple fighter would offer the advantages of low purchase and operational costs. New lightweight turbojet engines that were being developed enabled the concept to take shape.
In 1951, using company funds, he began work on his lightweight fighter concept, which was designated the "Fo-141 Gnat". The Gnat was to be powered by a Bristol BE-22 Saturn turbojet with 3,800 lbf (16.9 kN 1,724 kgp) thrust. However, the Saturn was cancelled, and so Petter's unarmed proof-of-concept demonstrator for the Gnat was powered by the less powerful Armstrong Siddeley Viper 101 with 1,640 lbf (7.3 kN / 744 kgp) thrust. The demonstrator was designated Fo-139 "Midge".
From this land-based basis, several navalized variants for the use on board of smaller ships were deducted and taken to the hardware stage. The Gnat's selling point was its very small size and low weight, so that it would be easy to handle, operate and stow, even if it was no dedicated carrier.
One development direction focused on rocket-assisted ZELL (Zero-Length-Launch) and conventional landing on land-based airstrips, while another direction reverted to the idea of a light jet-powered flying boat conversion for reconnaissance and (daylight) interception and attack duties.
Both were taken to the hardware stage as private ventures (even though supported by the MoD since both concepts were regarded as fundamental research), and the flying boat project took shape under the handle Folland Fo-150, internally referred to “Project Volans”.
The Fo-150 had only rudimentary similarity with the land-based aircraft, though. Beyond the addition of a hydrodynamic, lower hull, the fuselage was stretched between the cockpit and the wings, for a better CoG distribution. The wing area was increased considerably in order to compensate for the higher all-up weight, improve handling and lower landing speed. The horizontal stabilizers were moved away from the original low position, higher onto a new cruciform tail, in order to keep these surfaces away from spray. The fin itself was slightly enlarged, too.
Power came from a modified Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN). In order to protect the engine from water ingestion the air intakes were extended forward under the cockpit canopy and featured spray dams. Balance in the water was achieved through semi-retractable stabilizer floats. These could be folded backwards under the wings, behind bullet-shaped fairings at about half the wing span that also contained a pair of 30mm Aden cannons. Hardpoints above and under the wings allowed the carriage of light external weapons like unguided rocket pods, or, alternatively, test equipment and camera pods.
The first airframe for Project Volans was built in Folland's facility on the western side of the Hamble peninsula and later taken to the Solent in May 1955. On 14 June 1955, the aircraft inadvertently made its first short flight during a fast taxi run – the enlarged wing created a massive ground effect that easily lifted the light aircraft up into a glide when the nose raised through wakes to a certain degree. The Fo-150’s official maiden flight was on 9 July 1955.
The underpowered engine made the fighter sluggish, and the strong uplift close to the ground made handling complicated and created violent vibration during takeoff and landing. Work on the wings leading edge profile improved this situation somewhat, but they could not cure the sluggish performance.
Otherwise, handling turned out to be good, but the Fo-150 could never show its full potential due to the weak engine. A second airframe was finished until late 1955 and joined the flight tests from early 1956 on, while a third airframe was reserved for static tests.
Anyway, even before that, the Navy had been losing interest (problems with supersonic fighters on carrier decks having been overcome, and ship-based missiles filled the aerial defense role much more efficiently than aircraft). This relegated the Fo-150 and the whole Volans program to pure experimental status. As a consequence, the two airworthy airframes were de-militarized and the aircraft kept in service as testbeds for hydrodynamics, especially for the development of planing bottoms, hydrofoils and hull shapes for high speed ships.
In 1960, WS685 was also used for the development and tests of hydroskis, while its sister ship was retired and used for spares. This program lasted until 1963, and after that, the worn-out airframe was scrapped, too.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 10.44 m (34 ft 5 in)
Wingspan: 8,71 m (28 ft 6 in)
Heigh (keel to fin tip)t: 3.74 m (12 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 19.00 m² (204.5 ft²)
Empty weight: 2,560 kg (5,644 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 4,235 kg (9,336 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 695 km/h (375 knots, 432 mph) at sea level
Cruise speed: 324 km/h (175 knots, 201 mph)
Stall speed: 145 km/h (92 knots, 106 mph) with flaps down
Endurance: 1 hour 45 min
Service ceiling: 30,000 ft (9,150 m)
Armament:
2× 30mm ADEN cannon with 80 RPG in underwing pods
Two overwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
e.g. for SNEB rocket pods containing seven 68 mm rockets
or pods with 7.62 mm machine guns
Two underwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
for bombs or a pair of 50-Imp Gal (226 litre) drop tanks
The kit and its assembly:
Another submission to the 2016 “In the Navy” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and actually the consequence of a spontaneous post/comment on another modeler’s project just called “Royal Navy Gnat”, when the means and degree of navalization were still shrouded in mystery. I suggested a flying boat, inspired by the real Saro SR./A.1 and the Gnat’s high-mounted wings, which make the aircraft – or at least a model of it – suitable for a conversion.
Well, since the other Gnat turned out to become a ZELL aircraft, and I had a Matchbox Gnat in the stash, I decided to take my weird alternative idea to the (model) hardware stage.
Even though it is not obvious, pretty much of the Matchbox Gnat was used for this build, but it is masked under lots of putty and donation parts. These include:
- The lower half of a Smer SC-1 Seahawk float – a bit wide, but perfect in length
- The SC-1 also donated its stabilizer floats
- Leftover parts from a vintage (35+ years!) Matchbox F-14’s stabilizers, used as wing extensions
- Air intakes from a Matchbox F-5A, mounted upside down
- Stabilizers from a Hobby Boss MiG-15
The build went pretty straightforward: after the fuselage was done the SC-1 float was trimmed down and glued under it. Putty conceals the seams, and I am actually surprised how good these parts that were surely never meant to be united went together.
The cockpit features only the front seat, the rear position was omitted. The clear canopy was cut into three pieces, and the rear part glued onto the fuselage and blended into the overall shape with putty.
I felt that the deeper fuselage necessitated bigger wings, and instead of mounting complete donation parts I decided to keep the OOB parts and their shape, but extend them slightly with plugs – these are leftover parts from F-14 stabilizers from former projects, their width, length and also the sweep angle were perfect. In order to keep the relative wing tip position, the wing roots had to be moved forward, so that they ended up close to the cockpit and the air intakes. Again, putty conceals the intersections and was used to blend everything into each other – and with the enlarged wings this converted Gnat reminds a bit of the Me 163 Komet rocket fighter? At least, as long as the stabilizers were not mounted yet.
These come from a MiG-15 – bigger than the OOB parts, which appeared just too small for the bigger wing surface and their new position: in order to keep them clear from spray and the waterline I moved them upwards, together with a bullet fairing into the fin, which was simply divided above the rudder. The resulting fin extension was an appreciated extra, and the new cruciform tail looks very retro.
Placing the original air intakes onto the fuselage I found them to be too susceptible to water ingestion, so I wanted to extend them forward. But instead of using the OOB parts and bridging gaps with styrene pieces and putty, I found an old pair of F-5A air intakes with relative long ducts in the spares box. They were of good shape and size for the conversion, I just mounted them upside down, so that the longer leading edge is now on the intakes’ lower end, looking like a spray protector. A pair of spray dams was added to the nose, too.
How to balance the aircraft while afloat caused some headaches. The initial plan had been to place the SC-1 stabilizer floats with their slender pylons close to the wing tips, but I found this to be a very draggy solution for a jet aircraft.
The solution came while wondering where to place some armament: I used the Gnat’s (shortened) OOB slipper tanks as integral gun pods and modified their rear end into fairings for a semi-retracting float installation. The respective struts were scratched from wire and styrene.
The beaching trolley was highjacked from a vintage Revell F-16 kit (the rather clumsy one that represents the prototypes and which comes with a separate jet engine, its dolly and a small tractor). It was slightly modified and lowered, paper tissue cushions hold the model in place.
Painting and markings:
Since the flying boat version of the tiny Gnat (even if is based on the bigger trainer version!) is already exotic enough I decided to keep the livery true to the post WWII Royal Navy style, with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper surface, Sky undersides and a high waterline. In this case, Humbrol 123 and 95 are the basic tones, later treated with a black ink wash, panel lines drawn with a pencil and some panel shading with Humbrol 79 and 23, respectively. The planning surfaces were in the first place painted/primed with acrylic aluminum, so that later the enamel paint cover could be chipped away, for a lightly worn look.
The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey (Humbrol 32). Thankfully, no landing gear had to be built and painted, but instead the custom beaching trolley became trainer yellow.
The RN markings come from various sources, and finally the kit was sealed under a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish.
A funny project, and despite the weird idea and combination of parts the result does not look bad at all – in fact, one could think that it is a design or prop from a 1960’s James Bond movie or a Gerry Anderson creation?
RFA PROTEUS
makes an impressive sight as she departs HM Naval Base, Portsmouth as the winter sun makes an appearance.
RFA Proteus is a ship of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary within His Majesty's Naval Service of the
United Kingdom. Its roles being a platform for Remotely Operated Underwater Vehicles (ROUVs) and a testbed for new specialist capabilities, required for monitoring waters important to UK interests. Acquired in 2023, the ship entered drydock at Cammell Laird for modification into a Multi-Role Ocean Surveillance Ship (MROSS). She formally entered service in October 2023.
Photographic source;
Digital Expression UK (2025)
+++ 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 Folland 150 was directly inspired by the (modest) successes experienced by the Saro SR./A.1, a jet-powered flying boat fighter that went through trials in the late 1940ies.
The project had been kicked-off in the end phase of the 2nd World War, when the Imperial Japanese Navy with seaplane fighters such as the Nakajima A6M2-N (an adaptation of the Mitsubishi Zero) and the Kawanishi N1K demonstrated the effectiveness of a fighter seaplane.
In theory, seaplanes were ideally suited to conditions in the Pacific theatre, and could turn any relatively calm area of coast into an airbase. Their main disadvantage came from the way in which the bulk of their floatation gear penalized their performance compared to other fighters.
The new jet engines offered more power and aerodynamically cleaner designs, and the Saro SR./A.1 proved the soundness of the concept. But while the Saro SR./A.1 proved to have good performance and handling, the need for such aircraft had completely evaporated with the end of the war. Furthermore, the success of the aircraft carrier in the Pacific had demonstrated a far more effective way to project airpower over the oceans. The project was suspended and the prototype put into storage in 1950, but it was briefly resurrected in November 1950 owing to the outbreak of the Korean War, before realization of its obsolescence compared with land-based fighters, the prototype last flying in June 1951.
Anyway, this was not the end of the jet-powered flying boat fighter. After the Korean War, Saunders-Roe came up with a design called the "Saunders Roe Hydroski" (reminiscent of the Convair F2Y Sea Dart) to improve the performance closer to land-based aircraft but "received no official support". Other ship-based fighter concepts were developed and proposed, too. In the early Fifties, Folland made several proposals based on its newly developed light fighter, which would evolve into the Gnat.
The Gnat was the creation of WEW "Teddy" Petter, a British aircraft designer formerly of Westland Aircraft and English Electric. It was designed to meet the 1952 Operational Requirement OR.303 calling for a lightweight fighter. Petter believed that a small, simple fighter would offer the advantages of low purchase and operational costs. New lightweight turbojet engines that were being developed enabled the concept to take shape.
In 1951, using company funds, he began work on his lightweight fighter concept, which was designated the "Fo-141 Gnat". The Gnat was to be powered by a Bristol BE-22 Saturn turbojet with 3,800 lbf (16.9 kN 1,724 kgp) thrust. However, the Saturn was cancelled, and so Petter's unarmed proof-of-concept demonstrator for the Gnat was powered by the less powerful Armstrong Siddeley Viper 101 with 1,640 lbf (7.3 kN / 744 kgp) thrust. The demonstrator was designated Fo-139 "Midge".
From this land-based basis, several navalized variants for the use on board of smaller ships were deducted and taken to the hardware stage. The Gnat's selling point was its very small size and low weight, so that it would be easy to handle, operate and stow, even if it was no dedicated carrier.
One development direction focused on rocket-assisted ZELL (Zero-Length-Launch) and conventional landing on land-based airstrips, while another direction reverted to the idea of a light jet-powered flying boat conversion for reconnaissance and (daylight) interception and attack duties.
Both were taken to the hardware stage as private ventures (even though supported by the MoD since both concepts were regarded as fundamental research), and the flying boat project took shape under the handle Folland Fo-150, internally referred to “Project Volans”.
The Fo-150 had only rudimentary similarity with the land-based aircraft, though. Beyond the addition of a hydrodynamic, lower hull, the fuselage was stretched between the cockpit and the wings, for a better CoG distribution. The wing area was increased considerably in order to compensate for the higher all-up weight, improve handling and lower landing speed. The horizontal stabilizers were moved away from the original low position, higher onto a new cruciform tail, in order to keep these surfaces away from spray. The fin itself was slightly enlarged, too.
Power came from a modified Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN). In order to protect the engine from water ingestion the air intakes were extended forward under the cockpit canopy and featured spray dams. Balance in the water was achieved through semi-retractable stabilizer floats. These could be folded backwards under the wings, behind bullet-shaped fairings at about half the wing span that also contained a pair of 30mm Aden cannons. Hardpoints above and under the wings allowed the carriage of light external weapons like unguided rocket pods, or, alternatively, test equipment and camera pods.
The first airframe for Project Volans was built in Folland's facility on the western side of the Hamble peninsula and later taken to the Solent in May 1955. On 14 June 1955, the aircraft inadvertently made its first short flight during a fast taxi run – the enlarged wing created a massive ground effect that easily lifted the light aircraft up into a glide when the nose raised through wakes to a certain degree. The Fo-150’s official maiden flight was on 9 July 1955.
The underpowered engine made the fighter sluggish, and the strong uplift close to the ground made handling complicated and created violent vibration during takeoff and landing. Work on the wings leading edge profile improved this situation somewhat, but they could not cure the sluggish performance.
Otherwise, handling turned out to be good, but the Fo-150 could never show its full potential due to the weak engine. A second airframe was finished until late 1955 and joined the flight tests from early 1956 on, while a third airframe was reserved for static tests.
Anyway, even before that, the Navy had been losing interest (problems with supersonic fighters on carrier decks having been overcome, and ship-based missiles filled the aerial defense role much more efficiently than aircraft). This relegated the Fo-150 and the whole Volans program to pure experimental status. As a consequence, the two airworthy airframes were de-militarized and the aircraft kept in service as testbeds for hydrodynamics, especially for the development of planing bottoms, hydrofoils and hull shapes for high speed ships.
In 1960, WS685 was also used for the development and tests of hydroskis, while its sister ship was retired and used for spares. This program lasted until 1963, and after that, the worn-out airframe was scrapped, too.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 10.44 m (34 ft 5 in)
Wingspan: 8,71 m (28 ft 6 in)
Heigh (keel to fin tip)t: 3.74 m (12 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 19.00 m² (204.5 ft²)
Empty weight: 2,560 kg (5,644 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 4,235 kg (9,336 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 695 km/h (375 knots, 432 mph) at sea level
Cruise speed: 324 km/h (175 knots, 201 mph)
Stall speed: 145 km/h (92 knots, 106 mph) with flaps down
Endurance: 1 hour 45 min
Service ceiling: 30,000 ft (9,150 m)
Armament:
2× 30mm ADEN cannon with 80 RPG in underwing pods
Two overwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
e.g. for SNEB rocket pods containing seven 68 mm rockets
or pods with 7.62 mm machine guns
Two underwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
for bombs or a pair of 50-Imp Gal (226 litre) drop tanks
The kit and its assembly:
Another submission to the 2016 “In the Navy” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and actually the consequence of a spontaneous post/comment on another modeler’s project just called “Royal Navy Gnat”, when the means and degree of navalization were still shrouded in mystery. I suggested a flying boat, inspired by the real Saro SR./A.1 and the Gnat’s high-mounted wings, which make the aircraft – or at least a model of it – suitable for a conversion.
Well, since the other Gnat turned out to become a ZELL aircraft, and I had a Matchbox Gnat in the stash, I decided to take my weird alternative idea to the (model) hardware stage.
Even though it is not obvious, pretty much of the Matchbox Gnat was used for this build, but it is masked under lots of putty and donation parts. These include:
- The lower half of a Smer SC-1 Seahawk float – a bit wide, but perfect in length
- The SC-1 also donated its stabilizer floats
- Leftover parts from a vintage (35+ years!) Matchbox F-14’s stabilizers, used as wing extensions
- Air intakes from a Matchbox F-5A, mounted upside down
- Stabilizers from a Hobby Boss MiG-15
The build went pretty straightforward: after the fuselage was done the SC-1 float was trimmed down and glued under it. Putty conceals the seams, and I am actually surprised how good these parts that were surely never meant to be united went together.
The cockpit features only the front seat, the rear position was omitted. The clear canopy was cut into three pieces, and the rear part glued onto the fuselage and blended into the overall shape with putty.
I felt that the deeper fuselage necessitated bigger wings, and instead of mounting complete donation parts I decided to keep the OOB parts and their shape, but extend them slightly with plugs – these are leftover parts from F-14 stabilizers from former projects, their width, length and also the sweep angle were perfect. In order to keep the relative wing tip position, the wing roots had to be moved forward, so that they ended up close to the cockpit and the air intakes. Again, putty conceals the intersections and was used to blend everything into each other – and with the enlarged wings this converted Gnat reminds a bit of the Me 163 Komet rocket fighter? At least, as long as the stabilizers were not mounted yet.
These come from a MiG-15 – bigger than the OOB parts, which appeared just too small for the bigger wing surface and their new position: in order to keep them clear from spray and the waterline I moved them upwards, together with a bullet fairing into the fin, which was simply divided above the rudder. The resulting fin extension was an appreciated extra, and the new cruciform tail looks very retro.
Placing the original air intakes onto the fuselage I found them to be too susceptible to water ingestion, so I wanted to extend them forward. But instead of using the OOB parts and bridging gaps with styrene pieces and putty, I found an old pair of F-5A air intakes with relative long ducts in the spares box. They were of good shape and size for the conversion, I just mounted them upside down, so that the longer leading edge is now on the intakes’ lower end, looking like a spray protector. A pair of spray dams was added to the nose, too.
How to balance the aircraft while afloat caused some headaches. The initial plan had been to place the SC-1 stabilizer floats with their slender pylons close to the wing tips, but I found this to be a very draggy solution for a jet aircraft.
The solution came while wondering where to place some armament: I used the Gnat’s (shortened) OOB slipper tanks as integral gun pods and modified their rear end into fairings for a semi-retracting float installation. The respective struts were scratched from wire and styrene.
The beaching trolley was highjacked from a vintage Revell F-16 kit (the rather clumsy one that represents the prototypes and which comes with a separate jet engine, its dolly and a small tractor). It was slightly modified and lowered, paper tissue cushions hold the model in place.
Painting and markings:
Since the flying boat version of the tiny Gnat (even if is based on the bigger trainer version!) is already exotic enough I decided to keep the livery true to the post WWII Royal Navy style, with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper surface, Sky undersides and a high waterline. In this case, Humbrol 123 and 95 are the basic tones, later treated with a black ink wash, panel lines drawn with a pencil and some panel shading with Humbrol 79 and 23, respectively. The planning surfaces were in the first place painted/primed with acrylic aluminum, so that later the enamel paint cover could be chipped away, for a lightly worn look.
The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey (Humbrol 32). Thankfully, no landing gear had to be built and painted, but instead the custom beaching trolley became trainer yellow.
The RN markings come from various sources, and finally the kit was sealed under a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish.
A funny project, and despite the weird idea and combination of parts the result does not look bad at all – in fact, one could think that it is a design or prop from a 1960’s James Bond movie or a Gerry Anderson creation?
A former LNG SD40-2 passes Riley's Railhouse. This unit was the unit that Burlington Northern used in its Liquified Natural Gas program in the early 90's. It was a testbed unit and ran around with a fuel tender attached all the time. It was sold off after the BNSF merger and went to HLCX Leasing and was stripped of its BN designation but still had the distinct paint job. NS bought a round of HLCX lease units that were of BN heritage and that was one of them! Now it roams in the Chicago area of NS being used to do some heavy hauling. No LNG, no BN paint, but its still a SD40-2 through and through.
4th St
Chesterton, IN
July 18th, 2017
The XK120 was launched in roadster form at the 1948 London Motor Show as a testbed and show car for the new Jaguar XK engine. It caused a sensation, which persuaded Jaguar founder and design boss William Lyons to put it into production.
The "120" in its name referred to its 120 mph (193 km/h) top speed (faster with the windscreen removed), which made the XK120 the world's fastest standard production car at the time of its launch.[4]
It was available in two open versions, first as the roadster (designated OTS, for open two-seater, in America), then also as a drophead coupé (DHC) from 1953 – and also as a closed, or "fixed-head" coupé (FHC) from 1951. The DHC was a more deluxe open model, with wind-up windows, and wood-veneer dashboard and interior door caps, as on the FHC.
The roadster was successful in racing.
(Wikipedia)
- - -
Der Jaguar XK 120 war ein zweisitziger Roadster, den Jaguar 1948 als Nachfolger des S.S.100 auf den Markt brachte.
Der Jaguar XK 120 OTS (Open Two Seater, so die etwas umständliche Bezeichnung für den Roadster) besaß einen Sechszylinder-Reihenmotor mit 3442 cm³ Hubraum und 160 bhp.
Ab 1951 gab es den Jaguar XK 120 FHC (Fixed Head Coupé), ein Coupé mit gleicher Motorisierung und 194 km/h Höchstgeschwindigkeit. Bis zur Einstellung 1954 wurden 2678 Stück gebaut.
1953 kam der Jaguar XK 120 DHC (Drop Head Coupé), ein Cabriolet mit gefüttertem Stoffdach und der gleichen Motorisierung, auch als SE, dazu. Es wurde allerdings nur ein Jahr lang angeboten und erreichte in diesem Zeitraum die Stückzahl von 1767 Exemplaren.
(Wikipedia)
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'.
The Rolls Royce 747-200 test bed blasts off on another test flight for the mighty Trent 1000 engine.
F-WWAI Airbus Industrie Airbus A320-111
F-WWAI Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie 22 Feb 1987 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
F-WWFT Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie May 1991 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
rr
F-WWBA Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie 7 Jan 2001 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4 38005A
rr
Aircraft is used to develop enhancements for the A32S aircraft. It has been recently used for a variety of winglet testing.
wfu 29-07-2016
F-WWAI Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie Oct 2017 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
rr
Original test-registration reapplied and repainted into original 1987 Airbus livery for preservation at Aeroscopia Museum, Toulouse
F-WWCA Airbus Industrie Airbus A340-642 - cn 360
VIA Rail equipment is seen stripped down at CAD in Lachine. VIA Rail was mandated by a Transport Canada order released on October 19th of last year to do a number of tests on stainless steel cars. While nothing is confirmed, I would expect all of these cars to be scrapped. At left is a testbed built on the frame of VIA 6908,
Airbus Industrie Airbus A350-941 F-WWYB is departing from Frankfurt for the first time in its history. The aircraft is climbing out of runway 18 as flight AIB103 to Toulouse (TLS).
MSN 005 has had its first flight on 20.06.14. It is powered by 2x Rolls-Royce Trent XWB turbofans and is currently used as a testbed.
Please join my Facebook fan page:
www.facebook.com/pages/Thomas-Becker-Aviation-Photography...
...and there is a Plane Spotting group on Facebook you should visit:
www.facebook.com/groups/planespotting/
Flickr has done some major design changes (which I deeply regret). Are you missing collections in Flickr? Me, too!
But they are not lost, just hidden - you can go there by using one of the following links:
Special Aviation Photos
www.flickr.com/photos/thomasbecker/collections/7215762339...
Airlines of the World
www.flickr.com/photos/thomasbecker/collections/7215760571...
Aviation by Date
www.flickr.com/photos/thomasbecker/collections/7215760307...
Airline Alliances of the World
www.flickr.com/photos/thomasbecker/collections/7215762573...
Pentacon Praktica Super TL1000
German 35mm SLR.
An ideal (film-based) testbed for my M42 screwmount lenses.
Dirt cheap and the lightmeter might not be working anymore but it has a robust metal vertical focal-plane shutter.
Here with a Multi Coated Pentacon auto 1.8/50mm lens
'Experimental November Seven Eight Seven Romeo Romeo Heavy' off of runway 17L heading back home to Tucson after having a fifth engine, what Rolls Royce calls the 'Pearl 10X', fitted on the right wing. The new Pearl 10X is visible just behind the Trent 1000 in this picture. Fascinating to see three different engines on a five-engine airplane.
It can’t hurt to ask…
When we were in Las Cruces, my rocket mentor, Tom Atchison, did just that. He got an enthusiastic reply to his unusual proposal to use this mobile missile tracking system to track civilian rockets in a new competition launching this summer. We could use it for an independent audit of launch performance (distinct from the on-board GPS and altimeter logs that all of the rockets will carry).
This mobile EODAS system uses infrared, visible ultraviolet, and thermal sensors to provide “imaging, pyro event detection, and spatial position data from airborne payload delivery systems operating in hazardous environments.”
…not to mention some very cool home videos. =)
Rocket Mavericks is a new international rocketry and civilian space exploration competition. Tom is the founder and describes it well: “if you have heard of the Surf Mavericks, then you can get some idea where we are headed, but rather than surfing, we are focused on rockets.”
(I am trying to help this new non-profit with some enthusiasm and photos.)
Many adults remember Estes rockets fondly when we were kids. 300 million launches of Estes rockets sure leaves an impression. I find that it kindles a love of science – rocket science, that is – in our children. It is deeply inspirational and motivational to a new generation who sometimes wonder where the excitement is in learning physics, math and science in general.
As adults, scientists love to explore the frontiers of the imagination. We all retain some of the magic of that childhood wonder — especially the geeks among us — perhaps rekindled by a new challenge.
N330 EUG was the first Optare Excel to be registered, in November 1995. It is an L1000 model seating 34 passengers.
It was photographed several years later approaching Optare's Rotherham depot at Hellaby whilst running on trade plates.
In Barnet is Arriva London DW411, a Wright Gemini 2 DL on route 307 to Brimsdown, near Enfield
New in 2011 as a standard Gemini 2, it was fire damaged soon after entering service. It was returned to Wrightbus and modified as a testbed for the new Streetdeck integral vehicle. Subsequently, two Streetdecks which are run by Go-Ahead and Arriva were bought in 2014 and a batch of similar vehicles are on order for route 340, which are due in the autumn.
Route 307 is now operated by Metroline from Potters Bar garage
© Omid Mossavat
The unique testbed loco spent long periods out of normal service for test running and development of the thyristor control system, which eventually appeared in the class 90 and 91 locos. However it is seen here in normal service as it arrives at Euston with an InterCity service.
As a conicidence, in the background is 86102, one of the three class 86/1 locos which were rebuilt with revised equipment and bogies as prototypes for the class 87!
1989_05300015
Austrian Airlines, founded on September 30th, 1957, is the flag carrier of Austria and a subsidiary of the Lufthansa Group. Between 1988 and 2004 the company operated 4 Airbus A.310-300s.
OE-LAA (c/n 489 series -324) was delivered to Austrian Airlines in December 1988. In March 2000 the plane was sold to Air Plus Comet as EC-HLA. From July to October 2000 the aircraft was leased to Hapg-LLoys. Air Plus Comet retired the plane in December 2005 and sold it to Airbus. The plane was then used as a testbed by EADS CASA in Spain, fitted with a refueling boom and with large A310 BOOM DEMO title and EADS / CASA tail logo.
Slide taken at RIE (the old Munich Riem Airport) in January 1989. The plane wears the color scheme used by Austrian during the '80s.
Hams Travel Ltd., Flimwell:
Dennis Enviro300 SFD113 (12.0m)
N45F - 12/2007
Originally built in 2000 as part of the testbed for what would become the TransBus Enviro300, launched in 2003. Registered as a 57-plate once the bus was purchased by the current owners, Hams Travel of Flimwell. This unique E300 will be leaving the fleet in the next couple of weeks, having been sold in part exchange for a new Volvo coach.
Benenden Coachworks Yard
Sunday 21st May 2017
Greenham Common, 27 June 1981.
WD790 is a modified NF11 of the Royal Aircraft Establishment. It was used as a testbed for radar trials all its 'life'. It was also used as a radar target for missile trials. This classic was scrapped in 1984, unfortunately.
The point of the nose is not in the photo, grrrrr.
Scan of a printed photo.
BWI
Dec. 19, 2013
One of Northrop's small fleet of electronic testbeds.
It was manufactured in 1966. Based on the registeration number, this aircraft belonged to Westinghouse, before Northrop bought the company in 1996. So, it has been with the company for quite a while. Note on the side of the fuselage the outline of a large fairing that has been removed.
F-WWAI Airbus Industrie Airbus A320-111
F-WWAI Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie 22 Feb 1987 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
F-WWFT Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie May 1991 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
rr
F-WWBA Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie 7 Jan 2001 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4 38005A
rr
Aircraft is used to develop enhancements for the A32S aircraft. It has been recently used for a variety of winglet testing.
wfu 29-07-2016
F-WWAI Airbus A320-111 Airbus Industrie Oct 2017 Testbed 2x CFMI CFM56-5B4
rr
Original test-registration reapplied and repainted into original 1987 Airbus livery for preservation at Aeroscopia Museum, Toulouse
F-WWCA Airbus Industrie Airbus A340-642 - cn 360
In the centre of the frame is Boeing NB-52E 56-0632 which was the second B-52E built. She never saw any operational service but was used in a number of test programs mostly relating to stability and control. As the Control Configured Vehicle (CCV) testbed she was fitted with three canard control surfaces (two horizontal and one ventral) which were linked to computers receiving flight data from sensors mounted throughout the aircraft monitoring turbulence, which fed back compensatory control inputs. Sadly, this unique B-52 was scrapped in compliance with the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). Surrounding the NB-52E are various Gulf War 1 veteran G models to the right of shot, some Vietnam War era D models (bottom) and some even older B-52Cs on the left. The year 1993 saw the demise of many of these old bombers, AMARC was literally crammed with them. As part of the START treaty, 365 B-52s were flown to the Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. The bombers were stripped of all usable parts, then unceremoniously chopped into five pieces by a 13,000-pound steel blade dropped from a crane. The modern-day guillotine crashed down four times on each aircraft, severing the mammoth wings and leaving the fuselage in three pieces. The ruined B-52s remained in place for three months in order for orbiting Russian satellites to confirm the bombers had been destroyed, after which they were sold for scrap at 12 cents a pound.
Hams Travel Ltd., Flimwell:
Dennis Enviro300 SFD113 (12.0m)
N45F - 12/2007
Originally built in 2000 as part of the testbed for what would become the TransBus Enviro300, launched in 2003. Registered as a 57-plate once the bus was purchased by the current owners, Hams Travel of Flimwell. This unique E300 will be leaving the fleet in the next couple of weeks, having been sold in part exchange for a new Volvo coach.
Benenden Coachworks Yard
Sunday 21st May 2017