View allAll Photos Tagged base
Click here to receive our brochure.
Les Roches builds your management and leadership skills. Here at Les Roches, we ensure that our students are well versed in kitchen, service and rooms division.
These three areas are taught outside a traditional class environment as students learn by doing. This learning style is called hands-on or craft-based learning. Hands-on learning is critical to gain knowledge and skills you need to lead hospitality organizations in the future. These are the parts of the program that may students enjoy most, where they learn leadership skills and build confidence.
To find out more about Craft Based Learning please visit our Academic Programs webpage.
Connect with Les Roches on Facebook, Twitter, Les Roches Student Blog and Youtube.
Some background:
The idea for a heavy infantry support vehicle capable of demolishing heavily defended buildings or fortified areas with a single shot came out of the experiences of the heavy urban fighting in the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942. At the time, the Wehrmacht had only the Sturm-Infanteriegeschütz 33B available for destroying buildings, a Sturmgeschütz III variant armed with a 15 cm sIG 33 heavy infantry gun. Twelve of them were lost in the fighting at Stalingrad. Its successor, the Sturmpanzer IV, also known by Allies as Brummbär, was in production from early 1943. This was essentially an improved version of the earlier design, mounting the same gun on the Panzer IV chassis with greatly improved armour protection.
While greatly improved compared to the earlier models, by this time infantry anti-tank weapons were improving dramatically, too, and the Wehrmacht still saw a need for a similar, but more heavily armoured and armed vehicle. Therefore, a decision was made to create a new vehicle based on the Tiger tank and arm it with a 210 mm howitzer. However, this weapon turned out not to be available at the time and was therefore replaced by a 380 mm rocket launcher, which was adapted from a Kriegsmarine depth charge launcher.
The 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 L/5.4 was a breech-loading barrel, which fired a short-range, rocket-propelled projectile roughly 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in) long. The gun itself existed in two iterations at the time. One, the RaG 43 (Raketenabschuss-Gerät 43), was a ship-mounted anti-aircraft weapon used for firing a cable-spooled parachute-anchor creating a hazard for aircraft. The second, the RTG 38 (Raketen Tauch-Geschoss 38), was a land-based system, originally planned for use in coastal installations by the Kriegsmarine firing depth-charges against submarines with a range of about 3.000 m. For use in a vehicle, the RTG 38 was to find use as a demolition gun and had to be modified for that role. This modification work was carried out by Rheinmetall at their Sommerda works.
The design of the rocket system caused some problems. Modified for use in a vehicle, the recoil from the modified rocket-mortar was enormous, about 40-tonnes, and this meant that only a heavy chassis could be used to mount the gun. The hot rocket exhaust could not be vented into the fighting compartment nor could the barrel withstand the pressure if the gasses were not vented. Therefore, a ring of ventilation shafts was put around the barrel which channeled the exhaust and gave the weapon something of a pepperbox appearance.
The shells for the weapon were extremely heavy, far too heavy for a man to load manually. As a result, each of them had to be carried by means of a ceiling-mounted trolley from their rack to a roller-mounted tray at the breech. Once on the tray, four soldiers could then push it into the breech to load it. The whole process took 10 minutes per shot from loading, aiming, elevating and, finally, to firing.
There were a variety of rocket-assisted round types with a weight of up to 376 kg (829 lb), and a maximum range of up to 6,000 m (20,000 ft), which either contained a high explosive charge of 125 kg (276 lb) or a shaped charge for use against fortifications, which could penetrate up to 2.5 m (8 ft 2 in) of reinforced concrete. The stated range of the former was 5,650 m (6,180 yd). A normal charge first accelerated the projectile to 45 m/s (150 ft/s) to leave the short, rifled barrel, the 40 kg (88 lb) rocket charge then boosted this to about 250 m/s (820 ft/s).
In September 1943 plans were made for Krupp to fabricate new Tiger I armored hulls for the Sturmtiger. The Tiger I hulls were to be sent to Henschel for chassis assembly and then to Alkett, where the superstructures would be mounted. The first prototype was ready and presented in October 1943. By May 1944, the Sturmtiger prototype had been kept busy with trials and firing tests for the development of range tables, but production had still not started yet and the concept was likely to be scrapped. Rather than ditch the idea though, orders were given that, instead of interrupting the production of the Tiger I, the Sturmtigers would be built on the chassis of Tiger I tanks which had already been in action and suffered serious damage. Twelve superstructures and RW 61 weapons were prepared and mounted on rebuilt Tiger I chassis. However, by August 1944 the dire need for this kind of vehicle led to the adaptation of another chassis to the 380 mm Sturmmörser: the SdKfz. 184, better known as “Ferdinand” (after its designer’s forename) and later, in an upgraded version, “Elefant”.
The Elefant (German for "elephant") was actually a heavy tank destroyer and the result of mismanagement and poor planning: Porsche GmbH had manufactured about 100 chassis for their unsuccessful proposal for the Tiger I tank, the so-called "Porsche Tiger". Both the successful Henschel proposal and the Porsche design used the same Krupp-designed turret—the Henschel design had its turret more-or-less centrally located on its hull, while the Porsche design placed the turret much closer to the front of the superstructure. Since the competing Henschel Tiger design was chosen for production, the Porsche chassis were no longer required for the Tiger tank project, and Porsche was left with 100 unfinished heavy tank hulls.
It was therefore decided that the Porsche chassis were to be used as the basis of a new heavy tank hunter, the Ferdinand, mounting Krupp's newly developed 88 mm (3.5 in) Panzerjägerkanone 43/2 (PaK 43) anti-tank gun with a new, long L71 barrel. This precise long-range weapon was intended to destroy enemy tanks before they came within their own range of effective fire, but in order to mount the very long and heavy weapon on the Porsche hull, its layout had to be completely redesigned.
Porsche’s SdKfz. 184’s unusual petrol-electric transmission made it much easier to relocate the engines than would be the case on a mechanical-transmission vehicle, since the engines could be mounted anywhere, and only the length of the power cables needed to be altered, as opposed to re-designing the driveshafts and locating the engines for the easiest routing of power shafts to the gearbox. Without the forward-mounted turret of the Porsche Tiger prototype, the twin engines were relocated to the front, where the turret had been, leaving room ahead of them for the driver and radio operator. As the engines were placed in the middle, the driver and the radio operator were isolated from the rest of the crew and could be addressed only by intercom. The now empty rear half of the hull was covered with a heavily armored, full five-sided casemate with slightly sloped upper faces and armored solid roof, and turned into a crew compartment, mounting a single 8.8 cm Pak 43 cannon in the forward face of the casemate.
From this readily available basis, the SdKfz. 184/1 was hurriedly developed. It differed from the tank hunter primarily through its new casemate that held the 380 mm Raketenwerfer. Since the SdKfz. 184/1 was intended for use in urban areas in close range street fighting, it needed to be heavily armoured to survive. Its front plate had a greater slope than the Ferdinand while the sides were more vertical and the roof was flat. Its sloped (at 47° from vertical) frontal casemate armor was 150 mm (5.9 in) thick, while its superstructure side and rear plates had a strength of 82 mm (3.2 in). The SdKfz.184/1 also received add-on armor of 100 mm thickness, bolted to the hull’s original vertical front plates, increasing the thickness to 200 mm but adding 5 tons of weight. All these measures pushed the weight of the vehicle up from the Ferdinand’s already bulky 65 t to 75 t, limiting the vehicle’s manoeuvrability even further. Located at the rear of the loading hatch was a Nahverteidigungswaffe launcher which was used for close defense against infantry with SMi 35 anti-personnel mines, even though smoke grenades or signal flares could be fired with the device in all directions, too. For close-range defense, a 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun was carried in a ball mount in the front plate, an addition that was introduced to the Elefant tank hunters, too, after the SdKfz. 184 had during its initial deployments turned out to be very vulnerable to infantry attacks.
Due to the size of the RW 61 and the bulkiness of the ammunition, only fourteen rounds could be carried internally, of which one was already loaded, with another stored in the loading tray, and the rest were carried in two storage racks, leaving only little space for the crew of four in the rear compartment. To help with the loading of ammunition into the vehicle, a loading crane was fitted at the rear of the superstructure next to the loading hatch on the roof.
Due to the internal limits and the tactical nature of the vehicle, it was intended that each SdKfz. 184/1 (as well as each Sturmtiger) would be accompanied by an ammunition carrier, typically based on the Panzer IV chassis, but the lack of resources did not make this possible. There were even plans to build a dedicated, heavily armored ammunition carrier on the Tiger I chassis, but only one such carrier was completed and tested, it never reached production status.
By the time the first RW 61 carriers had become available, Germany had lost the initiative, with the Wehrmacht being almost exclusively on the defensive rather than the offensive, and this new tactical situation significantly weakened the value of both Sturmtiger and Sturmelefant, how the SdKfz 184/1 was semi-officially baptized. Nevertheless, three new Panzer companies were raised to operate the Sturmpanzer types: Panzer Sturmmörser Kompanien (PzStuMrKp) ("Armored Assault Mortar Company") 1000, 1001 and 1002. These originally were supposed to be equipped with fourteen vehicles each, but this figure was later reduced to four each, divided into two platoons, consisting of mixed vehicle types – whatever was available and operational.
PzStuMrKp 1000 was raised on 13 August 1944 and fought during the Warsaw Uprising with two vehicles, as did the prototype in a separate action, which may have been the only time the Sturmtiger was used in its intended role. PzStuMrKp 1001 and 1002 followed in September and October. Both PzStuMrKp 1000 and 1001 served during the Ardennes Offensive, with a total of four Sturmtiger and three Sturmelefanten.
After this offensive, the Sturmpanzer were used in the defence of Germany, mainly on the Western Front. During the battle for the bridge at Remagen, German forces mobilized Sturmmörserkompanie 1000 and 1001 (with a total of 7 vehicles, five Sturmtiger and two Sturmelefanten) to take part in the battle. The tanks were originally tasked with using their mortars against the bridge itself, though it was discovered that they lacked the accuracy needed to hit the bridge and cause significant damage with precise hits to vital structures. During this action, one of the Sturmtigers in Sturmmörserkompanie 1001 near Düren and Euskirchen allegedly hit a group of stationary Shermans tanks in a village with a 380mm round, resulting in nearly all the Shermans being put out of action and their crews killed or wounded - the only recorded tank-on-tank combat a Sturmtiger was ever engaged in. After the bridge fell to the Allies, Sturmmörserkompanie 1000 and 1001 were tasked with bombardment of Allied forces to cover the German retreat, as opposed to the bunker busting for which they had originally been designed for. None was actually destroyed through enemy fire, but many vehicles had to be given up due to mechanical failures or the lack of fuel. Most were blown up by their crews, but a few fell into allied hands in an operational state.
Total production numbers of the SdKfz. 184/1 are uncertain but, being an emergency product and based on a limited chassis supply, the number of vehicles that left the Nibelungenwerke in Austria was no more than ten – also because the tank hunter conversion had top priority and the exotic RW 61 launcher was in very limited supply. As a consequence, only a total of 18 Sturmtiger had been finished by December 1945 and put into service, too. However, the 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 remained in production and was in early 1946 adapted to the new Einheitspanzer E-50/75 chassis.
Specifications:
Crew: Six (driver, radio operator/machine gunner in the front cabin,
commander, gunner, 2× loader in the casemate section)
Weight: 75 tons
Length: 7,05 m (23 ft 1½ in)
Width: 3,38 m (11 ft 1 in)
Height w/o crane: 3,02 m (9 ft 10¾ in)
Ground clearance: 1ft 6¾ in (48 cm)
Climbing: 2 ft 6½ in (78 cm)
Fording depth: 3 ft 3¼ (1m)
Trench crossing: 8 ft 7 ¾ in (2,64 m)
Suspension: Longitudinal torsion-bar
Fuel capacity: 1.050 liters
Armour:
62 to 200 mm (2.44 to 7.87 in)
Performance:
30 km/h (19 mph) on road
15 km/h (10 miles per hour () off road
Operational range: 150 km (93 mi) on road
90 km (56 mi) cross-country
Power/weight: 8 hp/ton
Engine:
2× Maybach HL120 TRM petrol engines with 300 PS (246 hp, 221 kW) each, powering…
2× Siemens-Schuckert D1495a 500 Volt electric engines with 320 PS (316 hp, 230 kW) each
Transmission:
Electric
Armament:
1x 380 mm RW 61 rocket launcher L/5.4 with 14 rounds
1x 7.92 mm (0.312 in) MG 34 machine gun with 600 rounds
1x 100 mm grenade launcher (firing anti-personnel mines, smoke grenades or signal flares)
The kit and its assembly:.
This fictional tank model is not my own idea, it is rather based on a picture of a similar kitbashing of an Elefant with a Sturmtiger casemate and its massive missile launcher – even though it was a rather crude model, with a casemate created from cardboard. However, I found the idea charming, even more so because the Ferdinand/Elefant was rather a rolling bunker than an agile tank hunter, despite its powerful weapon. Why not use the same chassis as a carrier for the Sturmtiger’s huge mortar as an assault SPG?
The resulting Sturmelefant was created as a kitbashing: the chassis is an early boxing of the Trumpeter Elefant, which comes not only with IP track segments but also alternative vinyl tracks (later boxing do not feature them), and casemate parts come from a Trumpeter Sturmtiger.
While one would think that switching the casemate would be straightforward affair, the conversion turned out to be more complex than expected. Both Elefant and Sturmtiger come with separate casemate pieces, but they are not compatible. The Sturmtiger casemate is 2mm wider than the Elefant’s hull, and its glacis plate is deeper than the Elefant’s, leaving 4mm wide gaps at the sides and the rear. One option could have been to trim down the glacis plate, but I found the roofline to become much too low – and the casemate’s length would have been reduced.
So, I used the Sturmtiger casemate “as is” and filled the gaps with styrene sheet strips. This worked, but the casemate’s width created now inward-bent sections that looked unplausible. Nobody, even grazed German engineers, would not have neglected the laws of structural integrity. What to do? Tailoring the casemate’s sides down would have been one route, but this would have had created a strange shape. The alternative I chose was to widen the flanks of the Elefant’s hull underneath the casemate, which was achieved with tailored 0.5 mm styrene sheet panels and some PSR – possible through the Elefant’s simple shape and the mudguards that run along the vehicle’s flanks.
Some more PSR was necessary to blend the rear into a coherent shape and to fill a small gap at the glacis plate’s base. Putty was also used to fill/hide almost all openings on the glacis plate, since no driver sight or ball mount for a machine gun was necessary anymore. New bolts between hull and casemate were created with small drops of white glue. The rest of the surface details were taken from the respective donor kits.
Painting and markings:
This was not an easy choice. A classic Hinterhalt scheme would have been a natural choice, but since the Sturmelefant would have been converted from existing hulls with new parts, I decided to emphasize this heritage through a simple, uniform livery: all Ferdinand elements would be painted/left in a uniform Dunkelgelb (RAL, 7028, Humbrol 83), while the new casemate as well as the bolted-on front armor were left in a red primer livery, in two different shades (Humbrol 70 and 113). This looked a little too simple for my taste, so that I eventually added snaky lines in Dunkelgelb onto the primer-painted sections, blurring the contrast between the two tones.
Markings remained minimal, just three German crosses on the flanks and at the rear and a tactical code on the casemate – the latter in black and in a hand-written style, as if the vehicle had been rushed into frontline service.
After the decals had been secured under sone varnish the model received an overall washing with dark brown, highly thinned acrylic paint, some dry-brushing with light grey and some rust traces, before it was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish and received some dirt stains with mixed watercolors and finally, after the tracks had been mounted, some artist pigments as physical dust on the lower areas.
Again a project that appeared simple but turned out to be more demanding because the parts would not fit as well as expected. The resulting bunker breaker looks plausible, less massive than the real Sturmtiger but still a menacing sight.
So another shot of the eagle 1 looking ship with a shot of Saturn in the distance ?
So maybe Major Mars honed his skills on Mars and now he is moving on to Saturn ???
Made by TootsieToy in 1977.
so another Space themed toy inspired by Star Wars ?
The year of production 1977 makes that a likely guess !
TootsieToy adding in some monochromatic figures to
their metal and plastic vehicles assortment.
The two figures and all the great fantasy art based on the figures on the box make up for the lack luster vehicles .
So these fantasy themed play sets from TootsieToy are most appealing sealed in the box. Which is amazing to find any intact . As the toys are just laid in a tray and cellophane wrapped over. A very thin cellophane wrap.
So they get tears easily. And people will clear tape spots on the cellophane. The astronaut is Major Mars. The green robot is Zoltan/ Android . Says on the bottom of their feet bases.
I found these figures loose in the wild years ago before I ever knew what they were or went to. So as an adult collector I got to solve the riddle of the TootsieToy fantasy figures.
No known back story for these characters, other than what we can gather from the art work on the box.
It would appear Zoltan may be an assistant to Major Mars. But in one of the scenes Zoltan appears to be shooting a laser at Major Mars. So I don't know !
PictionID:54054388 - Catalog:14_032808 - Title:Schilling AFB Details: Site 550-10; View of Silo-Looking East Date: 10/11/1960 - Filename:14_032808.tif - - Images from the Convair/General Dynamics Astronautics Atlas Negative Collection. The processing, cataloging and digitization of these images has been made possible by a generous National Historical Publications and Records grant from the National Archives and Records Administration---Please Tag these images so that the information can be permanently stored with the digital file.---Repository: San Diego Air and Space Museum
I've no idea who Base Travel were but on 3rd July, 2009, they had sent their Dennis R series Caetano Enigma to Brighton. FJ53 VDD had been new to Reliant, Heather.
The Team Lotus Base Ketteringham Hall Norfolk UK.
Colin Chapman based the F1 team in this former stately Home, just a few miles from Lotus car factory at Hethel.
All of photographs published here are copyright © Anthony Fosh All Rights Reserved. They may not be reproduced and/or used in any form of publication, print or the Internet without my written permission
Base Camp Vegas
Aerial footage of beautiful landscapes, Subscribe to Youtube channel for full playlist & like on Facebook for recent post.
Base B8301786
Camera 3 (X8111806)
Text 1: Pete's Food Plot
Battery Level: 25%
Pics on camera: 0
camera3/p_000560.jpg: PIR Trigger
Xerém, RJ - Brasil - 14/10/2017 - CTVL - .
Torneio OPG. Jogo Fluminense x Americano.
FOTO DE MAILSON SANTANA/FLUMINENSE FC.
.
IMPORTANTE: Imagem destinada a uso institucional e divulgação, seu uso comercial está vetado incondicionalmente por seu autor e o Fluminense Football Club...
.
IMPORTANT: Image intended for institutional use and distribution. Commercial use is prohibited unconditionally by its author and Fluminense Football Club.
.
IMPORTANTE: Imágen para uso solamente institucional y distribuición. El uso comercial es prohibido por su autor y por el Fluminense Football Club.
The colonization of the Moon is the proposed establishment of permanent human communities on the Moon. Advocates of space exploration have seen settlement of the Moon as a logical step in the expansion of humanity beyond the Earth. Recent indication that water might be present in noteworthy quantities at the Lunar poles has increased interest in the Moon. Polar colonies could also avoid the problem of long Lunar nights (about 354 hours, a little more than two weeks) and take advantage of the sun continuously.
Permanent human habitation on a planetary body other than the Earth is one of science fiction's most prevalent themes. As technology has advanced, and concerns about the future of humanity on Earth have increased, the argument that space colonization is an achievable and worthwhile goal has gained momentum. Because of its proximity to Earth, the Moon has been seen as a prime candidate for the location of humanity's first permanently occupied extraterrestrial base.
A lunar outpost was an element of the George W. Bush era Vision for Space Exploration, which has been replaced with President Barack Obama's space policy. The outpost would have been an inhabited facility on the surface of the Moon. At the time it was proposed, NASA was to construct the outpost over the five years between 2019 and 2024. The United States Congress directed that the U.S. portion, "shall be designated the Neil A. Armstrong Lunar Outpost".
On December 4, 2006, NASA announced the conclusion of its Global Exploration Strategy and Lunar Architecture Study. The Lunar Architecture Study's purpose was to "define a series of lunar missions constituting NASA's Lunar campaign to fulfill the Lunar Exploration elements" of the Vision for Space Exploration. What resulted was a basic plan for a lunar outpost near one of the poles of the Moon, which would permanently house astronauts in six-month shifts. These studies were made before the discovery of water ice (5.6 ± 2.9% by mass) in a polar crater, which may substantially affect plans.
+++ 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 Étendard's history begins with two design requirements in the early 1950s. One was for a light jet fighter for the French Air Force, the other for a light fighter to serve as standard equipment with NATO air forces (from which Fiat's G.91 eventually emerged). Dassault used variations of the same basic design to produce prototypes for both these specifications, designated the Étendard II and Étendard VI respectively, but neither of which led to any orders. At the same time, the company evolved a larger and more powerful variant, originally designated Mystère XXIV, as a private venture.
Able to generate interest from the Navy, Dassault built a prototype of a navalised version. It was first demonstrated to the service in 1958. An order was placed which resulted in 69 fighter aircraft, designated Étendard IVM, and 21 reconnaissance versions designated Étendard IVP. From 1962, these began to be deployed aboard the new French Clemenceau class aircraft carriers.
Performance of the Étendard IV was never spectacular: low supersonic range at altitude, Mach 1.3 at 11,000 meters and Mach 0.97 at low altitude. In the 1970s it was clear that a replacement should be sought. For some time, this was hoped to be a navalised version of the SEPECAT Jaguar, the Jaguar M. But as the various political problems of the joint Anglo-French effort dragged out development, Dassault stepped in with an uprated version of the Étendard, dubbed Super Étendard, which began to replace its progenitor from 1978 on. The last of the original Étendard IVMs were withdrawn from the Aéronavale in 1991, although a handful of IVPs remained operational until 2004.
Even though the Étendard had only limited capability, airframes in good condition and with few flying hours found a taker: Israel, namely IAI. From 1980 until 1992, a total of thirty Étendard IVM an IVP found their way to Bedek, originally intended for a national naval strike fighter program for the IDF.
Anyway, interest in this project soon waned when the IDF was offered the F-16, and the updated IAI Kfir C2 and C7 were already in service, so that export customers for the updated Étendards were sought for. This customer appeared after several years in the form of Indonesia. In 1989, the Indonesian Navy (Tentara Nasional Indonesia Angkatan Laut, TNI–AL) took interest in these planes, after the USA put an embargo on running F-16 deliveries due to political differences over the independence of East Timor and Indonesia's military engagement in this conflict. Left without a modern attack aircraft (and a rotting fleet of aircraft of Soviet origin as well as light fighters like the F-5E), Indonesia looked for an alternative and found the fleet of unwanted Étendards in Israel.
After a major overhaul, the machines were revamped and updated, tailored to the new customer's needs. and re-designated Ètendard IVS. Main changes encompassed the installation of a non-afterburning Pratt & Whitney J52-P-408 turbojet with variable inlet guide vanes and 11,200 lbf (50 kN) of thrust instead of the original SNECMA Atar 8K-50 non-afterburning turbojet (rated at 11,025 lbs/49.0 kN), recognizable by the different nozzle arrangement. The IAI had experience with such an engine switch from its highly successful Super Mystère "Sa'ar" conversion in 1973, and Indonesia already used the J52 in its own Skyhawk fleet (also bought from Israel), so that costs for maintenance was appreciably lowered and the existing infrastructure could be used further.
The avionics suite was also modernized with domestic products. This update included an Elta EL/M-2021B pulse-Doppler radar (replacing the simple original Dassault Aida 7 navigation radar) in a re-shaped, deeper nose, together with a retractable refuelling probe.
Advanced systems, e. g. a NAVWASS (NAVigation And Weapon Aiming Sub-System) for attacking without use of radar and a Ferranti 105-S laser range finder and marked target seeker, added in a wedge-shaped fairing under the nose (the original stabilizer fin was deleted), now allowed the use of 'smart' weapons.
Ergonomics were improved, too, through a revised cockpit with more sophisticated electronics and displays. Overall performance was not significantly enhanced and even though the reconditioned Indonesian planes would exclusively be based at land, they retained their former carrier capabilities.
A total of 24 Étendard IVS strike aircraft were purchased and converted (actually all former Étendard IVM airframes), replacing some of the ageing A-4E Skyhawk fighter-bombers of Israeli origin and freeing Indonesian F-5Es from the ground attack/CAS role, leaving them to interceptor duties together with the few TNI AU's operational F-16s.
The Étendards were grouped under TNI–AL’s newly formed 801st Skadron (Squadron), building two attack flights and supplementing 800th Squadron with GAF Nomad Searchmaster B's and Searchmaster L twin-turboprops in their maritime patrol role. Consequentially, the 'new' Étendards bore the Indonesian Navy's insignia. Despite their age and simplicity, the Étendards added some serious 'punch' to TNI–AL’s maritime duties, helping protect the islands and coastlines surrounding Indonesia and defend them against seaborne threats.
The Indonesian Ètendards did not see a long active career, though: the age of the airframes took its toll. Maintenance effort was higher than expected, and two planes were lost in a tragic air crash during mock air combat in 1994.
From 1997 on, with an order for twelve Su-30K fighters from Russia and more modern and economical BAe Hawk Mk. 109 and 209 available for the strike role, the vintage Étendards were quickly and ultimately phased out. The last Étendard IVS made its final flight from Juanda Air Base on Surabaya on August 5th 2001.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 14.40 m (47 ft 3 in)
Wingspan: 9.60 m (31 ft 6 in)
Height: 3.79 m (12 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 29 m² (312 ft²)
Empty weight: 5.960 kg (13.130 lb)
Loaded weight: 8.380 kg (18,470 lb)
Max. take-off weight: 10,750 kg (23,700 lb)
Wing loading: 282 kg/m² (57 lbs/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.54
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,000 km/h (637 knots, 733 mph) at low level,
1,099 km/h (700 knots, 806 mph) at height
Range: 1.820 km (983 nmi, 1.130 mi)
Combat radius: 850 km (460 nmi, 530 mi) w. external stores & two drop tanks, hi-lo-hi profile
Service ceiling: 15,500 m (50,900 ft)
Rate of climb: 100 m/s (19,700 ft/min)
Powerplant:
1× Non-afterburning Pratt & Whitney J52-P-408 turbojet rated at 11,200 lbf (50 kN) of thrust
Armament:
2× 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA 552 cannons with 150 rounds per gun;
1.500 kg (3,300 lb) of payload on four external hardpoints, including a variety of guided and unguided bombs, Matra rocket pods with 18× SNEB 68 mm rockets each, drop tanks and AIM-9 Sidewinder or Matra Magic AAMs.
The kit and its assembly
Actually, I never liked the Étendard as a plane, it's IMHO dead boring. Furthermore, there's only a single, vintage Heller kit available in 1:72 scale, which was relaunched in early 2012. I recently also came across an aftermarket decal sheet with various national markings from TL Modellbau and the included and rather exotic Indonesian Navy insignia stirred my fantasy. Which plane could go with them? A Skyhawk? Plausible, but that would almost be real life. An A-7 Corsair II? Too big! Finally, I chose the dull 1st generation Étendard as a simple and naval basis and created a whiffy "après Aéronavale" story for it - and this became the first entry to the 2016 "In The Navy" Group Build at whatifmodelerd.com.
The kit is the original, vintage Heller offering, dug out somewhere in Australia, long before the recent re-issue hit the shelves. For its age it is nevertheless a good model, with the typical good fit of the Heller kits. Panel lines are mostly raised, but very fine - it's IMHO a very good model of the aircraft.
The Étendard was built mostly OOB, but both ends were modified. On the front end I changed the nose for the new/slightly bigger radome for the new radar (actually, it's a reversed nose from an Italeri IAI Kfir with the pitot fairing on the top side, converted into a retracted refuelling probe) and I added the scratched laser range finder under the nose, replacing the stabilizer fin. For the different jet engine I improvised a longer tail section with a smaller exhaust, inspired by the IDF's Sa'ar/converted SMB2 Super Mystères which have a tail construction that is very similar to the Étendard's. I used a former air intake from a Matchbox A.W. Meteor NF.11 as fuselage extension and added internally a pipe. Some antennae and wire pitots were added, too.
As armament, the TNI-AL machine received a pair of IR-guided 340 kg bombs (from a Hasegawa JASDF weapon set) against naval targets, and due to the Étendard's rather limited payload I also gave it smaller drop tanks, these belong to an Airfix G.91, IIRC. A pilot was also added, too, in order to make the kit look more lively. For the same reason the ventral air brakes and the flaps were lowered - an OOB option, no conversion.
Painting and markings:
The typical French Étendard looks boring, even in the more modern low-viz paint scheme. One major argument for a semi-authentic Indonesian version were pictures from TNI-AU's A-4E, F-5E and esp. early F-16A, which, for some time, bore a rather flashy wrap-around air superiority paint scheme in blues and greys, partly with low-viz markings. Since this livery would fit the timeline and the plane's purpose, I went for this option - known as 'Grape' aggressor paint scheme in the USAF - which consists, AFAIK, of three Federal Standard tones:
● FS 35414 Light Blue (very similar to RLM 65, Modelmaster 2033)
● FS 35164 Intermediate Blue (Humbrol 144)
● FS 35109 Blue (Modelmaster 2032)
Real life pics show rather bright colours on clean/well-kept planes like the A-4’s, but the paint must have weathered quickly, with diminishing contrast - esp. on the TNI-AU's F-5Es, which frequently lack contrast between the two lighter grey-blue shades.
The pattern was taken over from an early Indonesian F-16 and re-interpreted on the more compact Étendard. All in all the bluish-grey livery is nothing fancy, but it makes a nice contrast to the red and white pentagonal insignia and the colourful badge on the tail fin. And it's seriously different from the classic blue/white livery you are used to on this aircraft.
The interior was painted according to the instructions and with some reference pictures from French Navy Étendards: cockpit in dark grey, an aluminum landing gear and primed, chrome yellow landing gear wells.
The IR-guided bombs received standard olive drab bodies, but the guidance package became light grey, as an extra color contrast.
Markings come mostly from the scrap box. The Indonesian Navy insignia were taken from a roundel aftermarket sheet from TL Modellbau. The registration code and the "TNI AL" markings on wings and fuselage were improvised with single black letters from the same manufacturer too. Inscriptions and the like come from the original decal sheet and other sources with French reference.
After decals had been applied, some grinded soft pencil mine was rubbed onto the surfaces for weathering, and light dry brushing with light grey shades was done to simulate sun-bleached paint. I wanted to emphasize the harsh climate conditions under which this fictional machine would operate, as well as its overall age.
An exotic project, and what originally started just as a fictional livery option turned into more with the bigger nose and the elongated tail. But I think this effort was worthwhile, in order to set this Étendard with a second life apart from its dull French origin. The wrap-around camouflage looks odd, and the TNI-AL's markings just underline the oddness of this whif model. :D
Limited Edition Prints | Blog | Google+
It was my first day at Everest Base Camp and I was scouting the area for something to do. The day was almost over and I wondered down the little river a while before I found this spot. It was all very serene and there was not a person in sight. I didn't even notice the grazing Yack until is made a noise. You would think I would be able to spot a wild animal standing a few feet in front of me, but apparently I have lost my spidey sense. I setup my rig and waited for the light to get interesting while the Yack tried to make casual conversation with me. We talked about best places to graze and lady Yacks and all that jazz before I had to head back to camp. It was a nice quiet moment in the middle of no where.
I know - bad photo. It's also an old photo of an anti climatic, "under documented" old base. Tried to touch it up a bit with GIMP. My camera work back then was sub-par as I was just learning how to use it. Sadly this base is destroyed now, before ever being fully completed with no chance for better pics. This was an attempt to light the scene with a spot light. Lots of glare and shadows. Although it does give a particular drama to the scene, it's not my first choice.
+++ 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:
During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2. However, elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft. Around the same time, the Indian government was in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equip the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.
In 1956, HAL formally began design work on the supersonic fighter project. The Indian government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorized the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in the development of a modern aircraft industry in India. The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds, and able to effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to domestically design and produce an engine capable of propelling the aircraft. Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasized, and this led to the HF-24 Marut.
On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight. It was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that had powered the Folland Gnat, also being manufactured by HAL at that time. On 1 April 1967, the first production Marut was delivered to the IAF. While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production Maruts with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703s, meaning the aircraft could not attain supersonic speed. Although originally conceived to operate around Mach 2 the Marut in fact was barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powerful engines.
The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters. However, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure the Marut, nevertheless, but only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of a planned 214. Just after the decision to build the lukewarm Marut, the development of a more advanced aircraft with the desired supersonic performance was initiated.
This enterprise started star-crossed, though: after the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines of Western origin, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines, so that the Marut never realized its full potential due to insufficient power, and it was relatively obsolescent by the time it reached production.
Due to these restrictions India looked for other sources for supersonic aircraft and eventually settled upon the MiG-21 F-13 from the Soviet Union, which entered service in 1964. While fast and agile, the Fishbed was only a short-range daylight interceptor. It lacked proper range for escort missions and air space patrols, and it had no radar that enabled it to conduct all-weather interceptions. To fill this operational gap, the new indigenous HF-26 project was launched around the same time.
For the nascent Indian aircraft industry, HF-26 had a demanding requirements specification: the aircraft was to achieve Mach 2 top speed at high altitude and carry a radar with a guided missile armament that allowed interceptions in any weather, day and night. The powerplant question was left open, but it was clear from the start that a Soviet engine would be needed, since an indigenous development of a suitable powerplant would take much too long and block vital resources, and western alternatives were out of reach. The mission profile and the performance requirements quickly defined the planned aircraft’s layout: To fit a radar, the air intakes with movable ramps to feed the engines were placed on the fuselage flanks. To make sure the aircraft would fulfill its high-performance demands, it was right from the outset powered by two engines, and it was decided to give it delta wings, a popular design among high-speed aircraft of the time – exemplified by the highly successful Dassault Mirage III (which was to be delivered to Pakistan in 1967). With two engines, the HF-26 would be a heavier aircraft than the Mirage III, though, and it was planned to operate the aircraft from semi-prepared airfields, so that it would receive a robust landing gear with low-pressure tires and a brake parachute.
In 1962 India was able to negotiate the delivery of Tumansky RD-9 turbojet engines from the Soviet Union, even though no afterburner was part of the deal – this had to be indigenously developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). However, this meant that the afterburner could be tailored to the HF-26, and this task would provide HAL with valuable engineering experience, too.
Now knowing the powerplant, HAL created a single-seater airframe around it, a rather robust design that superficially reminded of the French Mirage III, but there were fundamental differences. The HF-26 had boxy air intakes with movable ramps to control the airflow to the two engines and a relatively wide fuselage to hold them and most of the fuel in tanks between the air ducts behind the cockpit. The aircraft had a single swept fin and a rather small mid-positioned delta-wing with a 60° sweep. The pilot sat under a tight canopy that offered - similar to the Mirage III - only limited all-round vision.
The HF-26's conical nose radome covered an antenna for a ‘Garud’ interception radar – which was in fact a downgraded Soviet ‘Oryol' (Eagle; NATO reporting name 'Skip Spin') system that guided the HF-26’s main armament, a pair of semi-active radar homing (SARH) ‚Saanp’ missiles.
The Saanp missile was developed specifically for the HF-26 in India but used many components of Soviet origin, too, so that they were compatible with the radar. In performance, the Saanp was comparable with the French Matra R.530 air-to-air missile, even though the aerodynamic layout was reversed, with steering fins at the front end, right behind the SARH seaker head - overall the missile reminded of an enlarged AIM-4 Falcon. The missile weighed 180 kg and had a length of 3.5 m. Power came from a two-stage solid rocket that offered a maximum thrust of 80 kN for 2.7 s during the launch phase plus 6.5 s cruise. Maximum speed was Mach 2.7 and operational range was 1.5 to 20 km (0.9 to 12.5 miles). Two of these missiles could be carried on the main wing hardpoints in front of the landing gear wells. Alternatively, infrared-guided R-3 (AA-2 ‘Atoll’) short-range AAMs could be carried by the HF-26, too, and typically two of these were carried on the outer underwing hardpoints, which were plumbed to accept drop tanks (typically supersonic PTB-490s that were carried by the IAF's MiG-21s, too) . Initially, no internal gun was envisioned, as the HF-26 was supposed to be a pure high-speed/high-altitude interceptor that would not engage in dogfights. Two more hardpoints under the fuselage were plumbed, too, for a total of six external stations.
Due to its wing planform, the HF-26 was soon aptly called “Teer” (= Arrow), and with Soviet help the first prototype was rolled out in early 1964 and presented to the public. The first flight, however, would take place almost a year later in January 1965, due to many technical problems, and these were soon complemented by aerodynamic problems. The original delta-winged HF-26 had poor take-off and landing characteristics, and directional stability was weak, too. While a second prototype was under construction in April 1965 the first aircraft was lost after it had entered a spin from which the pilot could not escape – the aircraft crashed and its pilot was killed during the attempt to eject.
After this loss HAL investigated an enlarged fin and a modified wing design with deeper wingtips with lower sweep, which increased wing area and improved low speed handling, too. Furthermore, the fuselage shape had to be modified, too, to reduce supersonic drag, and a more pronounced area ruling was introduced. The indigenous afterburner for the RD-9 engines was unstable and troublesome, too.
It took until 1968 and three more flying prototypes (plus two static airframes) to refine the Teer for serial production service introduction. In this highly modified form, the aircraft was re-designated HF-26M and the first machines were delivered to IAF No. 3 Squadron in late 1969. However, it would take several months until a fully operational status could be achieved. By that time, it was already clear that the Teer, much like the HF-24 Marut before, could not live up to its expectations and was at the brink of becoming obsolete as it entered service. The RD-9 was not a modern engine anymore, and despite its indigenous afterburner – which turned out not only to be chronically unreliable but also to be very thirsty when engaged – the Teer had a disappointing performance: The fighter only achieved a top speed of Mach 1.6 at full power, and with full external load it hardly broke the wall of sound in level flight. Its main armament, the Saanp AAM, also turned out to be unreliable even under ideal conditions.
However, the HF-26M came just in time to take part in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was, despite its weaknesses, extensively used – even though not necessarily in its intended role. High-flying slow bombers were not fielded during the conflict, and the Teer remained, despite its on-board radar, heavily dependent on ground control interception (GCI) to vector its pilot onto targets coming in at medium and even low altitude. The HF-26M had no capability against low-flying aircraft either, so that pilots had to engage incoming, low-flying enemy aircraft after visual identification – a task the IAF’s nimble MiG-21s were much better suited for. Escorts and air cover missions for fighter-bombers were flown, too, but the HF-26M’s limited range only made it a suitable companion for the equally short-legged Su-7s. The IAF Canberras were frequently deployed on longer range missions, but the HF-26Ms simply could not follow them all the time; for a sufficient range the Teer had to carry four drop tanks, what increased drag and only left the outer pair of underwing hardpoints (which were not plumbed) free for a pair of AA-2 missiles. With the imminent danger of aerial close range combat, though, During the conflict with Pakistan, most HF-26M's were retrofitted with rear-view mirrors in their canopies to improve the pilot's field of view, and a passive IR sensor was added in a small fairing under the nose to improve the aircraft's all-weather capabilities and avoid active radar emissions that would warn potential prey too early.
The lack of an internal gun turned out to be another great weakness of the Teer, and this was only lightly mended through the use of external gun pods. Two of these cigar-shaped pods that resembled the Soviet UPK-23 pod could be carried on the two ventral pylons, and each contained a 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon of Soviet origin with 200 rounds. Technically these pods were very similar to the conformal GP-9 pods carried by the IAF MiG-21FLs. While the gun pods considerably improved the HF-26M’s firepower and versatility, the pods were draggy, blocked valuable hardpoints (from extra fuel) and their recoil tended to damage the pylons as well as the underlying aircraft structure, so that they were only commissioned to be used in an emergency.
However, beyond air-to-air weapons, the HF-26M could also carry ordnance of up to 1.000 kg (2.207 lb) on the ventral and inner wing hardpoints and up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) on the other pair of wing hardpoints, including iron bombs and/or unguided missile pods. However, the limited field of view from the cockpit over the radome as well as the relatively high wing loading did not recommend the aircraft for ground attack missions – even though these frequently happened during the conflict with Pakistan. For these tactical missions, many HF-26Ms lost their original overall natural metal finish and instead received camouflage paint schemes on squadron level, resulting in individual and sometimes even spectacular liveries. Most notable examples were the Teer fighters of No. 1 Squadron (The Tigers), which sported various camouflage adaptations of the unit’s eponym.
Despite its many deficiencies, the HF-26M became heavily involved in the Indo-Pakistan conflict. As the Indian Army tightened its grip in East Pakistan, the Indian Air Force continued with its attacks against Pakistan as the campaign developed into a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar, and close-support attacks by fighter jets, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets by Canberras and An-12s, while Pakistan responded with similar night attacks with its B-57s and C-130s.
The PAF deployed its F-6s mainly on defensive combat air patrol missions over their own bases, leaving the PAF unable to conduct effective offensive operations. Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against PAF forward air bases in Pakistan until the end of the war, and interdiction and close-support operations were maintained. One of the most successful air raids by India into West Pakistan happened on 8 December 1971, when Indian Hunter aircraft from the Pathankot-based 20 Squadron, attacked the Pakistani base in Murid and destroyed 5 F-86 aircraft on the ground.
The PAF played a more limited role in the operations, even though they were reinforced by Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (whose identity remains unknown). The IAF was able to conduct a wide range of missions – troop support; air combat; deep penetration strikes; para-dropping behind enemy lines; feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target; bombing and reconnaissance. India flew 1,978 sorties in the East and about 4,000 in Pakistan, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 at the respective fronts. More than 80 percent of IAF sorties were close-support and interdiction and about 45 IAF aircraft were lost, including three HF-26Ms. Pakistan lost 60 to 75 aircraft, not including any F-86s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors. The imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. The PAF, which was solely focused on air combat, was reluctant to oppose these massive attacks and rather took refuge at Iranian air bases or in concrete bunkers, refusing to offer fights and respective losses.
After the war, the HF-26M was officially regarded as outdated, and as license production of the improved MiG-21FL (designated HAL Type 77 and nicknamed “Trishul” = Trident) and later of the MiG-21M (HAL Type 88) was organized in India, the aircraft were quickly retired from frontline units. They kept on serving into the Eighties, though, but now restricted to their original interceptor role. Beyond the upgrades from the Indo-Pakistani War, only a few upgrades were made. For instance, the new R-60 AAM was introduced to the HF-26M and around 1978 small (but fixed) canards were retrofitted to the air intakes behind the cockpit that improved the Teer’s poor slow speed control and high landing speed as well as the aircraft’s overall maneuverability.
A radar upgrade, together with the introduction of better air-to-ai missiles with a higher range and look down/shoot down capability was considered but never carried out. Furthermore, the idea of a true HF-26 2nd generation variant, powered by a pair of Tumansky R-11F-300 afterburner jet engines (from the license-built MiG-21FLs), was dropped, too – even though this powerplant eventually promised to fulfill the Teer’s design promise of Mach 2 top speed. A total of only 82 HF-26s (including thirteen two-seat trainers with a lengthened fuselage and reduced fuel capacity, plus eight prototypes) were built. The last aircraft were retired from IAF service in 1988 and replaced with Mirage 2000 fighters procured from France that were armed with the Matra Super 530 AAM.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 14.97 m (49 ft ½ in)
Wingspan: 9.43 m (30 ft 11 in)
Height: 4.03 m (13 ft 2½ in)
Wing area: 30.6 m² (285 sq ft)
Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)
Gross weight: 10,954 kg (24,149 lb) with full internal fuel
Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,613 lb) with external stores
Powerplant:
2× Tumansky RD-9 afterburning turbojet engines; 29 kN (6,600 lbf) dry thrust each
and 36.78 kN (8,270 lbf) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,700 km/h (1,056 mph; 917 kn; Mach 1.6) at 11,000 m (36,000 ft)
1,350 km/h (840 mph, 730 kn; Mach 1.1) at sea level
Combat range: 725 km (450 mi, 391 nmi) with internal fuel only
Ferry range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi) with four drop tanks
Service ceiling: 18,100 m (59,400 ft)
g limits: +6.5
Time to altitude: 9,145 m (30,003 ft) in 1 minute 30 seconds
Wing loading: 555 kg/m² (114 lb/sq ft)
Armament
6× hardpoints (four underwing and two under the fuselage) for a total of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb);
Typical interceptor payload:
- two IR-guided R-3 or R-60 air-to-air-missiles or
two PTB-490 drop tanks on the outer underwing stations
- two semi-active radar-guided ‚Saanp’ air-to-air missiles or two more R-3 or R-60 AAMs
on inner underwing stations
- two 500 l drop tanks or two gun pods with a 23 mm GSh-23L autocannon and 200 RPG
each under the fuselage
The kit and its assembly:
This whiffy delta-wing fighter was inspired when I recently sliced up a PM Model Su-15 kit for my side-by-side-engine BAC Lightning build. At an early stage of the conversion, I held the Su-15 fuselage with its molded delta wings in my hand and wondered if a shortened tail section (as well as a shorter overall fuselage to keep proportions balanced) could make a delta-wing jet fighter from the Flagon base? Only a hardware experiment could yield an answer, and since the Su-15’s overall outlines look a bit retro I settled at an early stage on India as potential designer and operator, as “the thing the HF-24 Marut never was”.
True to the initial idea, work started on the tail, and I chopped off the fuselage behind the wings’ trailing edge. Some PSR was necessary to blend the separate exhaust section into the fuselage, which had to be reduced in depth through wedges that I cut out under the wings trailing edge, plus some good amount of glue and sheer force the bend the section a bit upwards. The PM Model's jet exhausts were drilled open, and I added afterburner dummies inside - anything would look better than the bleak vertical walls inside after only 2-3 mm! The original fin was omitted, because it was a bit too large for the new, smaller aircraft and its shape reminded a lot of the Suchoj heavy fighter family. It was replaced with a Mirage III/V fin, left over from a (crappy!) Pioneer 2 IAI Nesher kit.
Once the rear section was complete, I had to adjust the front end - and here the kitbashing started. First, I chopped off the cockpit section in front of the molded air intake - the Su-15’s long radome and the cockpit on top of the fuselage did not work anymore. As a remedy I remembered another Su-15 conversion I did a (long) while ago: I created a model of a planned ground attack derivative, the T-58Sh, and, as a part of the extensive body work, I transplanted the slanted nose from an academy MiG-27 between the air intakes – a stunt that was relatively easy and which appreciably lowered the cockpit position. For the HF-26M I did something similar, I just transplanted a cockpit from a Hasegawa/Academy MiG-23 with its ogival radome that size-wise better matched with the rest of the leftover Su-15 airframe.
The MiG-23 cockpit matched perfectly with the Su-15's front end, just the spinal area behind the cockpit had to be raised/re-sculpted to blend the parts smoothly together. For a different look from the Su-15 ancestry I also transplanted the front sections of the MiG-23 air intakes with their shorter ramps. Some mods had to be made to the Su-15 intake stubs, but the MiG-23 intakes were an almost perfect fit in size and shape and easy to integrate into the modified front hill. The result looks very natural!
However, when the fuselage was complete, I found that the nose appeared to be a bit too long, leaving the whole new hull with the wings somewhat off balance. As a remedy I decided at a rather late stage to shorten the nose and took out a 6 mm section in front of the cockpit - a stunt I had not planned, but sometimes you can judge things only after certain work stages. Some serious PSR was necessary to re-adjust the conical nose shape, which now looked more Mirage III-ish than planned!
The cockpit was taken mostly OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat and gave it a trigger handle made from thin wire. With the basic airframe complete it was time for details. The PM Model Su-15s massive and rather crude main landing gear was replaced with something more delicate from the scrap box, even though I retained the main wheels. The front landing gear was taken wholesale from the MiG-23, but had to be shortened for a proper stance.
A display holder adapter was integrated into the belly for the flight scenes, hidden well between the ventral ordnance.
The hardpoints, including missile launch rails, came from the MiG-23; the pylons had to be adjusted to match the Su-15's wing profile shape, the Anab missiles lost their tail sections to create the fictional Indian 'Saanp' AAMs. The R-3s on the outer stations were left over from a MP MiG-21. The ventral pylons belong to Academy MiG-23/27s, one came from the donor kit, the other was found in the spares box. The PTB-490 drop tanks also came from a KP MiG-21 (or one of its many reincarnations, not certain).
Painting and markings:
The paint scheme for this fictional aircraft was largely inspired by a picture of a whiffy and very attractive Saab 37 Viggen (an 1:72 Airfix kit) in IAF colors, apparently a model from a contest. BTW, India actually considered buying the Viggen for its Air Force!
IAF aircraft were and are known for their exotic and sometimes gawdy paint schemes, and with IAF MiG-21 “C 992” there’s even a very popular (yet obscure) aircraft that sported literal tiger stripes. The IAF Viggen model was surely inspired by this real aircraft, and I adopted something similar for my HF-26M.
IAF 1 Squadron was therefore settled, and for the paint scheme I opted for a "stripish" scheme, but not as "tigeresque" as "C 992". I found a suitable benchmark in a recent Libyian MiG-21, which carried a very disruptive two-tone grey scheme. I adapted this pattern to the HA-26M airframe and replaced its colors, similar to the IAF Viggen model, which became a greenish sand tone (a mix of Humbrol 121 with some 159; I later found out that I could have used Humbrol 83 from the beginning, though...) and a very dark olive drab (Humbrol 66, which looks like a dull dark brown in contrast with the sand tone), with bluish grey (Humbrol 247) undersides. With the large delta wings, this turned out to look very good and even effective!
For that special "Indian touch" I gave the aircraft a high-contrast fin in a design that I had seen on a real camouflaged IAF MiG-21bis: an overall dark green base with a broad, red vertical stripe which was also the shield for the fin flash and the aircraft's tactical code (on the original bare metal). The fin was first painted in green (Humbrol 2), the red stripe was created with orange-red decal sheet material. Similar material was also used to create the bare metal field for the tactical code, the yellow bars on the splitter plates and for the thin white canopy sealing.
After basic painting was done the model received an overall black ink washing, post-panel shading and extensive dry-brushing with aluminum and iron for a rather worn look.
The missiles became classic white, while the drop tanks, as a contrast to the camouflaged belly, were left in bare metal.
Decals/markings came primarily from a Begemot MiG-25 kit, the tactical codes on the fin and under the wings originally belong to an RAF post-WWII Spitfire, just the first serial letter was omitted. Stencils are few and they came from various sources. A compromise is the unit badge on the fin: I needed a tiger motif, and the only suitable option I found was the tiger head emblem on a white disc from RAF No. 74 Squadron, from the Matchbox BAC Lightning F.6&F.2A kit. It fits stylistically well, though. ;-)
Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (except for the black radome, which became a bit glossy) and finally assembled.
A spontaneous build, and the last one that I completed in 2022. However, despite a vague design plan the model evolved as it grew. Bashing the primitive PM Model Su-15 with the Academy MiG-23 parts was easier than expected, though, and the resulting fictional aircraft looks sturdy but quite believable - even though it appears to me like the unexpected child of a Mirage III/F-4 Phantom II intercourse, or like a juvenile CF-105 Arrow, just with mid-wings? Nevertheless, the disruptive paint scheme suits the delta wing fighter well, and the green/red fin is a striking contrast - it's a colorful model, but not garish.
+++ 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 Royal Libyan Air Force (سلاح الجو الملكي الليبي , Al Quwwat al Jawwiya al Malakiya al Libiyya) was established in September 1962 by a decision of the minister of defense Abd al-Nabi Yunis. Lt. Col. al-Hadi Salem al-Husomi was assigned to lead the new force. It was originally equipped with a small number of transports and trainers. In May 1967, the Kingdom of Libya reached an agreement with the United States to supply Northrop F-5A and Bs to the Royal Libyan Air Force and more advanced trainers, in the form of six Cessna T-37C trainers.
The Cessna T-37 Tweet (designated Model 318 by Cessna) was a small, economical twin-engined jet trainer type which flew for decades as a primary trainer for the United States Air Force (USAF) and in the air forces of several other nations. It was a response to the USAF’s request for proposals for a "Trainer Experimental (TX)" program in 1952, specifying a lightweight, two-seat basic trainer for introducing USAF cadets to jet aircraft. Cessna responded to the TX request with a twin-jet design with side-by-side seating. The USAF liked the Cessna design and the side-by-side seating since it let the student and instructor interact more closely than with tandem seating. In the spring of 1954, the USAF awarded Cessna a contract for three prototypes of the Model 318, and a contract for a single static test aircraft. The Air Force designated the type as XT-37.
The XT-37 had a low, straight wing, with the engines buried in the wing roots, a clamshell-type canopy hinged to open vertically to the rear, a control layout similar to that used on board of contemporary operational USAF aircraft, ejection seats, and tricycle landing gear with a wide track of 14 ft (4.3 m). It first flew on 12 October 1954. The wide track and a steerable nosewheel made the aircraft easy to handle on the ground, and the short landing gear avoided the need for access ladders and service stands. The aircraft was designed to be simple to maintain, with more than 100 access panels and doors. An experienced ground crew could change an engine in about half an hour.
The XT-37 was aerodynamically clean, so much so that a speed brake was fitted behind the nosewheel doors to help increase drag for landing and for use in other phases of flight. Since the short landing gear placed the engine air intakes close to the ground, screens pivoted over the intakes from underneath when the landing gear was extended, to prevent foreign object damage.
The XT-37 was fitted with two Continental-Teledyne J69-T-9 turbojet engines, French Turbomeca Marboré engines built under license, with 920 lbf (4.1 kN) thrust each. The engines had thrust attenuators to allow them to remain spooled-up (i.e. rotating at speeds above idle) during landing approach, permitting shorter landings while still allowing the aircraft to easily make another go-around in case something went wrong. Empty weight of the XT-37 was 5,000 lb (2,300 kg).
Tests showed the XT-37 had a maximum speed of 390 mph (630 km/h) at altitude, with a range of 935 mi (1,505 km). The aircraft had a service ceiling of 35,000 feet (10,700 m) but was unpressurized and was therefore limited to an operational ceiling of 25,000 feet (7,600 m) by USAF regulations.
The production T-37A was similar to the XT-37 prototypes, except for minor changes to fix problems revealed by the flight-test program. The first T-37A was completed in September 1955 and flew later that year. The T-37A was very noisy, even by the standards of jet aircraft. The intake of air into its small turbojets emitted a high-pitched shriek that led some to describe the trainer as the "Screaming Mimi", the "6,000 pound dog whistle" or "Converter" (= converts fuel and air into noise and smoke). The piercing whistle quickly gave the T-37 its name, the "Tweety Bird", or just "Tweet". The Air Force spent a lot of time and money soundproofing buildings at bases where the T-37 was stationed, and ear protection remains mandatory for all personnel when near an operating aircraft.
The USAF ordered 444 T-37As, with the last produced in 1959. In 1957, the US Army evaluated three T-37As for battlefield observation and other combat support roles, but eventually procured the Grumman OV-1 Mohawk instead. However, the Air Force liked the T-37A, but considered it to be underpowered; consequently, they ordered an improved version, the T-37B, with uprated J-69-T-25 engines. The new engines provided about 10% more thrust and were more reliable. Improved avionics were also specified for the new variant. A total of 552 newly built T-37Bs was constructed through 1973, and all surviving T-37As were eventually upgraded to the T-37B standard as well.
The T-37A and T-37B had no built-in armament and no stores pylons for external armament. In 1961, Cessna began developing a modest enhancement of the T-37 for use as a weapons trainer. This new variant, the T-37C, was primarily intended for export and could be used for light attack duties if required. The respective changes included stronger wings, with a pylon under each wing outboard of the main landing gear well, and the T-37C could also be fitted with wingtip fuel tanks, each with a capacity of 65 US gal (245 l), that could be dropped in an emergency. A computing gunsight and gun camera were added, too, and the T-37C could also be fitted with a reconnaissance camera mounted inside the fuselage.
The primary armament of the T-37C was the General Electric "multipurpose pod" with a .50 caliber (12.7 mm) machine gun with 200 rounds, two 70 mm (2.75 in) folding-fin rocket pods, and four practice bombs. Other stores, such as folding-fin rocket pods or even IR-guided Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, could be carried, too. However, the changes increased the weight of the T-37C by 1,430 lb (650 kg). As the engines were not upgraded, this reduced top speed to 595 km/h (370 mph), though the optional wingtip tanks increased maximum range to 1,770 km (1,100 mi). A total of 273 T-37Cs were exported until T-37 production stopped in 1975.
The F-5s and the T-37s were the first dedicated combat aircraft for the young Libyan Air Force, which only operated six Douglas C-47 transports and three Lockheed T-33A trainers at the time. Fifty-six personnel underwent training at bases in the US, pilots at Williams Air Force Base; a US Survey Team on Expansion came to Libya in August 1968 to supervise the introduction of the new jet aircraft and service them. The first aircraft arrived at Wheelus Air Base, a former US facility about 11 kilometers (6.8 mi) from Tripoli and local training started immediately.
Despite this enthusiastic start, the Royal Libyan Air Force and its small stock of aircraft did not last long because the government was overthrown in a coup d’état in 1969. The USA left Libya in 1970 and the air force changed its name to the Libyan Arab Republic Air Force (LARAF), and Wheelus Air Base was subsequently renamed Okba Ben Nafi Air Base, becoming the LARAF’s headquarter.
During the following months, Libya distanced itself from the United Kingdom and the United States and the serviceability of the older American aircraft quickly declined, especially the F-5s were affected. Eight F-5 single-seaters and two two-seaters had been delivered until then, as well as four T-37Cs - the rest of the order was cancelled. Educated service personnel for these aircraft was initially loaned from Greece as an emergency measure, but this did not help much, and most were eventually sold to Turkey (the F-5s) and Greece (the T-37Cs). Instead, close ties were developed with France, and, accordingly, an order for 110 Dassault Mirage 5s fighter bombers, twelve Fouga Magisters, ten Aérospatiale Alouette IIIs and nine Aérospatiale SA 321 Super Frelons was signed in December 1969, and in 1971 the LARAF still received eight C-130Hs from the United States. Negotiations for the purchase of Soviet military aircraft only started in 1973, in the light of the experiences of the Yom Kippur War, but relations with France were maintained.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 29 ft 3 in (8.92 m)
Wingspan: 33 ft 99.3 in (12.581 m)
Height: 9 ft 2 in (2.79 m)
Wing area: 201 sq ft (18.7 m²)
Aspect ratio: 6.2:1
Airfoil: NACA 2418 at root, NACA 2412 at tip
Empty weight: 5,484 lb (2.490 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,000 lb (3.632 kg)
Powerplant:
2× Continental-Teledyne J69-T-25 turbojets, 1,025 lbf (4.56 kN) thrust each
Performance:
Maximum speed: 595 km/h (370 mph)
Cruise speed: 360 mph (580 km/h, 310 kn) at 35,000 ft (11,000 m)
Stall speed: 85 mph (137 km/h, 74 kn)
Range: 932 mi (1,500 km, 810 nmi) with internal fuel
Service ceiling: 38,700 ft (11,800 m)
Rate of climb: 3,370 ft/min (17.1 m/s)
Armament:
2 underwing pylons for stores up to 500 lb (227 kg) each
The kit and its assembly:
This small but exotic what-if model was inspired by decals for an RLAF F-5A from a Colorado Decals sheet – and I had stumbled upon these rather hapless aircraft that only served for a few months under this flag in a F-5 book. I found the historic time slot interesting and wondered about other aircraft that could have been introduced in 1968 and found that Libya might have needed some more and more modern jet trainers than the three T-33 it had. My first choice was the British Jet Provost, but since Libya procured the equipment from US sources, a Hasegawa A-37 kit from a lot (and without any plan for it yet) came to the rescue.
At first I wanted to build the Tweet OOB, but found that the A-37 was a little “too much” for Libya’s needs, so I decided to retrograde it to a T-37C – a light trainer, but still armed. Biggest changes were the omission of the refueling probe, the gun port was faired over, and I left away the optional tip tanks and replaced them with scratched wing tips, made from styrene. A small dorsal antenna fairing “hump” was added, a smaller one that the A-37s feature. Even though they were not necessary to represent the real aircraft I added styrene tube dummies to the exhaust ports - the gaping OOB holes did not convince me.
The underwing hardpoints were reduced to just a pair of pylons, and the light armament now consist only of a pair of LAU-7 unguided missile launchers (from the Italeri NATO weapons set). The single-piece canopy was cut into two parts for open display, in the cockpit two gunsights, seat belts and a hydraulic piston for the open canopy were added.
Painting and markings:
The RLAF F-5s were the benchmark, and they carried a rather simple/dry livery: the were painted overall in a dull silver lacquer (not NMF), similar to the USAF prototypes, with a black anti-glare panel. Finding a good paint for this look/finish was not easy, though, and I eventually settled for Humbrol 11 (Silver) with a light black ink washing and post-panel-shading with Humbrol’s Matt Aluminum metallizer (27002).
The cockpit interior became medium grey while landing gear and air intakes became white. The LAU-7 pods became very light grey.
To emphasize the Tweet’s trainer role I pimped the uniform silver livery with dayglo orange markings, procured from an Airfix Jet Provost sheet. National markings were taken from the aforementioned Colorado Decals F-5 sheet, even though its national markings are wrong: they lack green, they were just printed in 2C. To mend this flaw, I just added a thin green decal stripe to the flag on the fin, and the roundels, which are pretty small on the F-5, were completely replaced with bigger alternatives: Albanian air force markings from an Antonov An-2 (Balkan Models sheet), with a small green decal circle added to their center. Simple, but effective, and in combination with the orange stripes the whole aircraft looks quite attractive. The tactical codes were taken from a Myanmar MiG-29 (Caracal Models sheet). Most stencils were taken from the OOB sheet, with some more added from the 1/72 A-37 aftermarket sheet from PrintScale.
After a light treatment with graphite around the jet nozzles the model was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri), and this IMHO comes pretty close to the real world RLAF F-5 finish.
A small project, even though the tank-less wing tips were quite challenging. However, the Libyan Tweet looks very convincing, and with the high-viz trainer markings the whole package even has a stylish touch. The early Libyan roundels are also quite exotic, since they were only used for a couple of months
Today (14 July 2015) is the first national day of remembrance for victims of honour-based abuse.
It is the first national Remembrance Day introduced by the charity Karma Nirvana in conjunction with Cosmopolitan Magazine.
Greater Manchester Police and Whalley Range High School for girls have collaborated to use it to remember victims and launch an awareness campaign encouraging young people to denounce honour based abuse crimes and make a difference for future generations.
The campaign is #dishonourthecrime and Whalley Range has produced a video in conjunction with GMP which has been disseminated to all schools across Greater Manchester.
The video was launched during the event and as a mark of respect pupils at the school released balloons at midday with the #dishonor the crime message.
Detective Chief Inspector Nicky Porter from Greater Manchester Police, said: “Choice is a very short word but one that many often take for granted. Each day we make decisions about our life from what we wear, the jobs we have and our friends.
“Unfortunately there are thousands of young women and men throughout the country who don’t have a choice. Being forced into a marriage to simply uphold your family’s ‘honour’ is no way to live a life. You should have the freedom to make decisions for yourself.
“By reporting the crime to police, we will ensure you are safeguarded, listened too and you are protected. Our campaign #dishonourthecrime is clear in its message. It is important that together with our communities we dishonour these crimes.”
The date is particularly poignant as it would have been Shafilea Ahmed’s 29th birthday, and as a tribute to her we remember the thousands of victims of honour-based violence across the world.
Shafilea’s tragic murder after years of violence at the hands of her parents shone a light on the hidden issue of honour-based violence within our communities.
Every day young women and men live in fear of those who are meant to love and nurture them, because the perpetrators of these crimes are often close family members , victims are reluctant to report. GMP recognises this and wants to use the opportunity today to raise awareness and encourage people to report incidents of abuse to the police.
Across GMP there have been in access of 120 incidents of honour based abuse reported in the past 12 mths The majority of these incidents have been reported by women between the ages of 15-24yrs .While it is known that there are male victims of honour based abuse, we believe this is an area which is relatively unreported.
Sharon Allen, Senior Child Protection Officer from Whalley Range 11-18 High School, said: “We have been recognised as a beacon of good practice in the area of safeguarding – particularly forced marriage and honour based violence. We have developed our practice over many years ensuring that the wellbeing of young people remain at the very heart of what we do. We are honoured to be the host for the North West’s Annual National Day of Remembrance.”
Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner Jim Battle said: “Today would have been Shafilea Ahmed’s 29th birthday and as a tribute to her we remember the thousands of victims of honour-based violence across the world. Shafilea’s tragic murder after years of violence at the hands of her parents rightly shocked the nation and shone a light on the hidden issue of honour-based violence within our communities. Every day young women and men live in fear of those who are meant to love and nurture them.
“So it’s important that while we commemorate we must also commit to putting an end to this abuse and today’s event is a step towards that. By talking openly about it, educating our young people and raising awareness in our communities we can challenge it and give victims a lifeline.
“I also want to congratulate Karma Nirvana and Cosmopolitan Magazine it’s thanks to their dedicated campaigning that the victims of honour-based violence will never be forgotten.”
Cosmopolitan and Karma Nirvana are encouraging people to sign their petition to pledge their support for change. You can sign the pledge by clicking the following link: www.change.org.uk/dishonourthecrime
For more information on the national campaign go to: www.cosmopolitan.co.uk/britainslostwomen
If you are a victim or know someone who is you can report to police on 101. Always dial 999 in an emergency.
+++ 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 term "Schwerer Panzerspähwagen" (= heavy armoured reconnaissance vehicle) covers a broad family of 6- and later 8-wheeled armored cars Germany used before and during the Second World War.
In the German Army, armored cars were originally intended for the traditional cavalry missions of reconnaissance and screening. They scouted ahead and to the flanks of advancing mechanized units to assess enemy location, strength and intention. Their primary role was reconnaissance, but they would engage similar or light units and at times attempt to capture enemy patrols.
The first of the German armored cars, the Sd.Kfz. 231, was developed in secret, since no open research or production for military vehicles was possible at that time, and it was therefore based on modified Daimler-Benz, Büssing or Magirus 6x4 truck chassis’, onto which a welded body with sloped armor was mounted.
Depending on the manufacturer the vehicles differed in details and armament, but the 231 was typically armed with a 2 cm KwK 30 L/55 autocannon (with 200 rounds) and a co-axial Maschinengewehr 13 machine gun (with 1.300 rounds) in a small turret. The crew consisted of a commander, gunner, driver, and a radio operator. A unique design feature was that the vehicle had a second driver's position in the rear, occupied by the radio operator, so that it could be driven either forwards or backwards with relative ease and change direction within 10 seconds. The vehicle weighed 5,35 t, was only lightly armored (8/14,5 mm) and could attain a top speed of 70 km/h (44 mph) on the road, but its off-road performance was rather limited.
Several variants of the six-wheeled scout car were developed, some with separate designations. One of them was the Sd.Kfz. 232 (6 Rad), which carried a Fu.Ger.11 SE 100 medium range and a Fu.Spr.Ger.A short range radio. This command model was very distinctive because of the heavy "bedspring" antenna over most of the hull. This antenna was supported by two insulated, vertical connecting tubes at the back corners of the hull, and an inverted U-shaped tube construction on the turret sides with a central joint allowed the turret to retain its full 360° traverse.
The 231 vehicle family was introduced into service in 1932 and already began to be replaced in 1937 when the German Army switched production to heavier and more off-road-capable 8-wheeled armored cars (the 232 (8-Rad), which was a different vehicle than the 232 6-Rad, and later to the more sophisticated and capable 234). Despite being replaced in frontline units, the six-wheel vehicles were still used by Aufklärungs ("reconnaissance") units during the Invasion of Poland, the Battle of France, and the invasion of the USSR. Most of them were withdrawn afterwards for use in internal security and training, and a small number was converted into half-track scout cars after the Inspectorate for Motorized Troops (AHA/In 6) had decided in 1939 that it would be useful that light, armored half-tracks would accompany tanks in the attack. They could satisfy requirements for which a larger vehicle wouldn't be needed, such as headquarters, artillery forward observer, radio, and scout vehicles. Demag, the designer of the smallest half-track then in service, the Sd. Kfz. 10, was selected to develop the "light armored troop carrier" (leichter gepanzerter Mannschafts-Transportwagen), which became the Sd.Kfz. 250. In order to bridge the operational gap until the introduction of this new vehicle, the outdated surplus 232 radio scout cars were ordered into an instantaneous conversion program.
To this end, the Sd.Kfz. 10’s running gear with its torsion bar suspension was taken off the rack, shortened by one road wheel station, and then adapted to the 232 (6-Rad)’s rear hull, where the interleaved track gear replaced the original pair of rear axles. The front axle remained unpowered, though. The armor was improved with additional armor plates (now reaching up to 30mm at the front) and the front suspension was beefed up in order to cope with the vehicle’s higher total weight of 6,2 tons and the heavier terrain that it could master now. For the same reasons, the 232 (6-Rad)’s original Büssing water-cooled MA 9 6-cylinder petrol engine with a mere 68 hp (48 kW) was replaced by a Maybach HL42 TRKM 6-cylinder motor with 4.17-litre (254 cu in), delivering 100 hp (74 kW) and much more torque. With this new engine and despite the tracked running gear the vehicle remained surprisingly fast, reaching a top speed of more than 60 km/h (40 mph) on the road. The original armament was retained, even though it was already outdated and ineffective against armored opponents. But the small turret could not carry any bigger weapon and a replacement with a bigger turret was ruled out, since there was no time for a new development that would match the relatively narrow bearing. However, in order to improve the chances of survival, an array of smoke dischargers was installed on the front bumper which held six cartouches.
A total of 120 Sd.Kfz. 232 (6-Rad) were converted in the course of 1939 and 1940 and re-designated 232 (Halbkette). However, their production was immediately stopped when it was clear that the new Sd. Kfz. 250 would be ready for service in 1941. Until then, the modified vehicles were deployed to France, Northern Africa and Russia, primarily used by artillery forward observers to accompany tank and mechanized infantry units.
At the Eastern front they were retired after the battle of Moscow in December 1941, and the last vehicles were used by the Afrikakorps in Northern Africa until late 1942.
Specifications:
Crew: Four (commander, gunner, driver, radio operator/rear driver)
Weight: 5,2 tons (11.450 lb)
Length: 5,57 metres (18 ft 3 in)
Width: 1,82 metres (5 ft 11 ½ in)
Height (incl. antenna): 2,87 metres (9 ft 4 ¾ in)
Ground clearance: 28.5 cm (10 in)
Suspension: Torsion bar and leaf springs (front axle)
Fuel capacity: 105 litres (23 imp gal; 28 US gal)
Armor:
8–30 mm (0.31 – 1.18 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 65 km/h (41 mph)
Sustained road speed: 48 km/h (30 mph)
Cross country speed: up to 35 km/h (22 mph)
Operational range: 250 km (155 miles)
Power/weight: 19,23 PS/ton
Engine:
Maybach HL42 TRKM water-cooled straight 6-cylinder petrol engine with 100 hp (74 kW)
Transmission:
Maybach 7 + 3 speed VG 102128 H
Armament:
1× 20 mm KwK 30 L/55 autocannon with 200 rounds
1× MG 13 machine gun mounted co-axially with 1.300 rounds
6× smoke dischargers, mounted to the vehicle’s front
The kit and its assembly:
This little, fictional vehicle was inspired by one of some profile drawings created and published by Logan Hartke at whatifmodelers.com, showing the Sd. Kfz. 232 with different half track arrangements – including the Sd. Kfz. 250's. When I finally got hold of the Italeri Sd. Kfz. 232 kit with the unique antenna (there’s also a more frequent one without this detail), I decided to re-create the 232/251 combo, because the vehicle looked really good and plausible, and there would actually have been a historic gap between 1939 and 1941 when it could have been realized, as outlined in the background.
The Italeri kit was basically built OOB, just the chassis had to be modified – with the help of a resin set with 1:72 Sd. Kfz. 250 tracks and front wheels from German short run manufacturer ModelTrans/Silesian Models. The parts were crisp and quite clean, and the track parts as well as the front wheels were mated to the original suspension with the help of added axis' as spacers between the two tracks. Just the mudguards had to be modified in order to match the more spacious, new running gear - since an extension was not easy I decided to just use their front and back ends and implant a new upper deck between them, adding a styrene profile on the flanks so that the original shape of the wheel arches could be more or less retained. Ended up better than expected!
The small gap between the tracks' and the front wheels' mudguards was closed with a small piece of styrene - similar to the Sd, Kfz. 250's arrangement.
As a vehicle operating in North Africa I added an improvised sun sail to the antenna array, made from paper tissue that was soaked in highly thinned white glue and later painted.
Painting and markings:
Many German vehicles that had been transferred to Northern Africa initially retained their original camouflage, and that was a uniform, very dark grey (RAL 7021, to be specific), sometimes with dark brown mottles added. This was totally unsuited for the environment, so that the crews had to improvise. Some vehicles were painted with Italian colors, even British paints (from salvaged enemy bases and convoys) were used. Alternatively, many crews mixed sand and dirt with water in a bucket and “painted” their grey vehicles over, or the hull was smeared with oil and sand was thrown onto it. It took quite a while until dedicated Africa colors had been developed and used in the factories or even in the field, so that some interesting schemes appeared.
My Sd. Kfz. 232 was to represent one of these all-grey vehicles that had received an improvised desert camouflage “on the go”. In order to create this look, I gave the whole vehicle an initial primer coat in Humbrol 67. Once dry, I added a streaky coat of thinned Revell 16 (Sand) on every upper/external surface, letting the dark grey shine through here and there. The areas for the national markings and tactical codes were spared, so that the decals would later astand out on a dark "halo" of the original color.
On top of the improvised desert camouflage I also added sand and dust through highly thinned paintbox colors (ochre and some burnt umber).
The sun sail was painted in field grey, but it received a dry brushing treatment in order to emphasize the tissue texture as well as the antenna shape below, and it was also "dusted" with paintbox colors.
Finally, everything was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can and teh lower vehicle areas were lightly dusted with mineral pigments.
A quick project, realized in just three days. The running gear conversion itself was quite simple - the biggest issues were the extension of the rear mudguards and the fiddly and highly delicate antenna array. But the result looks quite good - and in the unusual desert camouflage for this type of vehicle it's really a weird sight.
Recipe Name: Cooper 218
Cone: 6 Color:
Firing: Oxidation Surface: Semimatte
Amount Ingredient
36 Feldspar--Custer
9 Whiting
22 Dolomite
28 Silica
5 Bentonite
100 Total
Additives
10 Rutile
Unity Oxide
.051 Na2O
.1 K2O
.3 MgO
.549 CaO
1.000 Total
.184 Al2O3
.006 Fe2O3
2.383 SiO2
12.9 Ratio
7.1 Exp
Comments:
-----------------------------------
Calculations by GlazeMaster™
------------------------------------
past & future editions : q-base 2012 2011 2010
enjoy our girls collection : sexy party babes
do you like ? become a fan : Facebook Cyber Factory
our next photoshoots : Cyber Factory party agenda
Lake Abiquiu, Southwest Base - A view of Lake Abiquiu from CO 96, near the dam. If you are going to create a manmade lake from the many creeks here, this is a perfect setting! Abiquiu is west of Santa Fe in the northwest part of New Mexico, and home to a former famous resident, artist Georgia O'Keefe.
Some friends and I were camping this weekend, and and again the Aurora Borealis showed herself over the sky!
THE ANCIENT LANGUAGE OF SOUNDS AND SIGNS
April 27th, 2010
@ Mobius
725 Harrison Avenue, Suite One
Boston MA 02118
Dancers:
Olivier Besson
Ellen Godena www.mobius.org/user/27
Liz Roncka www.myspace.com/realtimeperformance
Musicians:
Haggai Cohen Milo (bass) www.myspace.com/jatul
Amir Milstein (flute)
Jamey Haddad (percussion) www.jameyhaddadmusic.com
A very special evening of improvised music and dance featuring musicians Haggai Cohen Milo (bass) and Amir Milstein (flute) and movement artists Olivier Besson, Ellen Godena and Liz Roncka.
ARTIST BIOS
Olivier Besson - Movement Artist - is an improvisational movement artist who hails from France and is based in Boston. In the period from 1980 until the mid 90's, Olivier studied Contact Improvisation with Robin Feld, Nancy Stark Smith, Lisa Nelson and Andrew Harwood, and Improvisation / Real Time composition with Daniel Lepkoff and Julyen Hamilton. During that time, he also practiced and performed Bugaku (Court dance from Japan) with Arawana Hayashi. Other training includes Butoh with Maureen Feming and Action Theater with Ruth Zaporah.
Most notably, Olivier’s work has been presented: *in the US - at Dance Theatre Workshop (NYC), Judson Church (NYC), New York Improvisation festival, Walker Art Centre (Minneapolis), Boston Dance Umbrella, Florida Dance Festival, Dance Place (Washington DC), The Boston Conservatory, Boston University, Radford University (Virginia), *and internationally - at the National Institute of the Arts (Taipei, Taiwan), Die Pratze (Tokyo), Art of Movement Festival (Yaroslav, Russia), Micadanses (Paris) and with Compagnie Vertige (Nice, France). He has collaborated with many individuals including Chris Aiken, Lisa Schmidt, Debra Bluth, Ming-Shen Ku, Pamela Newell, Toshiko Oiwa and musicians/composers Mike Vargas, Peter Jones, Jane Wang and Grant Smith. Locally, he has guest danced for Dawn Kramer, Micki Taylor-Pinney and Diane Noya. His ongoing performance projects involve collaborations with Liz Roncka in Boston and Emmanuelle Pepin in Nice (France) .
Olivier is currently on faculty at The Boston Conservatory (dance division). He has been on faculty at Canal Danse (Paris), the French National Circus School (CNAC), Bates Dance Festival, Emerson College and the School of Fine Arts at Boston Universtity. He has taught residencies at the National Institute of the Arts (Taipei, Taiwan), Le Centre Choregraphique de Danse / Daniel Larieu (Tours, France), the University of Minnesota, and Radford University (Virginia). He has also taught masterclasses for teen / pre-teen programs at Walnut Hill, Cambridge School of Weston, Jeanette Neil Dance Studios, Brookline High and Cambridge Rindge and Latin.
Haggai Cohen Milo - At the young age of 25, bass player and composer Haggai Cohen Milo is already a known name in the international music scene. Mr. Cohen Milo, currently operating from Berkeley, CA, brings exotic flavors to his music from his native middle east country, Israel. In both his compositions and in his playing, there is a contemporary mix of sound between East and West. His group the Secret Music Project, that features his personal musical sound and vision, has performed in some of the most important festivals around the world including the Aspen Music Festival, the Atlantic Jazz Festival (Canada), Boston First Night and many more.
Mr. Cohen-Milo first gained international recognition when he won the First Prize in the International Ensemble Competition in Belgium 2006. In the same year, Cohen Milo was also awarded the DownBeat Magazine Music Awards and the grand prize at the Fish Middleton Jazz Soloist Competition held in Washington, DC.
As a Composer, Cohen Milo has composed the score for two full enough feature films, Intimate Enemies (2008), by the internationally known Mexican director Fernando Sariñana and SPAM (2009) by the director Charlie Gore. Cohen Milo released his debut album in January 2007 under the prestigious record label “Fresh Sound - New Talent”. The album received enthusiastic reviews in the US and in Europe. Cohen Milo also recorded with different artists for Warner Music, Sunnyside Records and more.
With a fast growing touring career, Cohen Milo has already performed on some of the most important stages around the world, including Carnegie Hall and Birdland (New York), Getxo International Jazz Festival (Spain), The Jazz Station (Belgium) and Rome Music Festival (Italy), to name a few.
Cohen Milo graduated in 2009 from the prestigious New England Conservatory of Music in Boston where he studied with such masters as Danilo Perez, Bob Moses, Jamey Hadad and Jerry Bergonzi.
"... Haggai Cohen Milo revealed over a set of ridiculously infectious music that he's in the soul restoration business. Yessiree. He is!" (Graham Pilsworth, "The Coast", Canada)
Amir Milstein - Flutist and composer - is a graduate of the "Rubin Academy of Music" in Jerusalem (B.M. in jazz and classical flute), and the New England Conservatory (Masters degree in music performance, 2010) Amir established his career in the world-music scene founding acknowledged ensembles such as Bustan Abraham and Tucan Trio with which he has recorded and performed worldwide.
His musical background represents a variety of styles and cultures including classical, jazz, Mediterranean and Latin. He has collaborated with artists such as Zakir Hussein, Tito Puente, Ross Daly, Omar Farouk Tekbilek and Armando Macedo, among others and has participated in distinguished concert venues and festivals, both as a player and a composer.
He has collaborated with several choreographers, with whom he has composed for modern and flamenco dance groups and has composed and recorded several film scores. (His recent work on the documentary film "The Case for Israel- Democracy's Outpost" is currently presented at film festivals worldwide). Amir played in musical shows in the Israeli television and has collaborated and recorded numerous albums with Israel's leading artists, such as Matti Caspi, Shlomo Gronich, Gidi Gov, Miki Gavrielov, Leah Shabbat, and many others.
With over twenty years of experience teaching flute, recorders and music theory, Amir developed a unique musical education program and has instructed at the "Karev Music Educational Program" in Israel. He currently teaches at the New England Conservatory, Boston, and has lectured and presented workshops at music schools such as the Berklee College of music, Boston and Berkeley University, CA. Before moving to Boston, in 2004 Amir was also a faculty member at the "Hed College of Contemporary Music" in Tel Aviv, Israel. Amir presents an interactive workshop for schools and colleges called: "A World of Flutes"- Introducing the evolution of woodwinds through live music, stories, and a demonstration of over 80 musical instruments.
Ellen Godena - Movement Artist - is an experimental performer, choreographer, and Mobius Artists Group member. Her recent work has focused on the relationships between human, non-human (organic), and machine (non-organic) movement as a method for studying human development. Recent solo and collaborative works have been quests to define these relationships through the use of primitive, robotic entities in performance.
Ellen’s training, artistic influences and inspiration derive from the study of Japanese avant-garde movement and theater forms that have developed since the early 1960’s, primarily the butoh dances created by Japanese artists Kazuo Ohno and Tatsumi Hijikata, physical theater, and contemporary dance. Since 1998, she has performed solo, group, and ensemble work in Boston, Philadelphia, Providence, and New York City. She was a former dancer with the Boston-based Kitsune Dance Theater (2003-06) under the direction of Deborah Butler, and the NYC post-modern butoh troupe, the Vangeline Theater (2006-08) under the direction of Vangeline. She has performed with Master butoh artist Katsura Kan (Curious Fish, 2002, 2008), and has studied with internationally recognized artists such as Zack Fuller, Hiroko Tamano, Su-En, Diego Pinon, and Katsura Kan. Her primary, long-term training has been with American artists Deborah Butler, Vangeline, and Jennifer Hicks. Currently, Ellen is presenting solo robotics – movement projects in addition to performing regularly with Liz Roncka's Real-Time Performance Project in Boston, MA. She holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree from the Rhode Island School of Design in Studio Painting (1997), and a Master's degree in Human Development and Psychology from Harvard University (2005).
Liz Roncka - Movement Artist - is an avid practitioner of movement improvisation and contemporary dance. She is the director of lizroncka/Real-Time Performance Project,a Mobius Artists Group member and a collaborating artist with Emma Jupe, a Paris-based improvisation collective. Her work has been presented in Boston, NYC, San Francisco, Budapest and Paris.
Liz's early training was in the tradition of classical ballet at the School of the New Bedford Ballet. In college, Liz’s focus shifted toward contemporary dance and improvisation. She was a member of the Dance Collective of Boston from 1998-2005. Liz has had the pleasure of performing modern dance and improvisational work under the direction of: Ramelle Adams, Emily Beattie, Ruth Benson-Levin, Debra Bluth, Alissa Cardone, Sean Curran,Ellen Godena, Andrew Harwood, Michael Jahoda/White Box Project, Dawn Kramer, Light Motion, Karen Murphy-Fitch and Micki Taylor-Pinney.
Much of Liz's work is developed in deep collaboration with sound artists, most notably Jane Wang, Haggai Cohen Milo, Jessyka Luzzi, Sean Frenette and Akili Jamal Haynes. Current projects include an improvisational duo with Forbes Graham (trumpet) and an collaboration with Philippe Lejeune (visual artist) developing a movement piece within a glass installation exploring the intersection of reality and reflected images. For more information please see:
www.dailydanceproject.blogspot.com
Feel free to extend this into your own implement!
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/TheScooterGuy/LDD/MOCs/Technic...
This is my seventh Lego Space set, and the first that is from the later generation of Lego Space Classic line. Introduced in 1984, this set comes with yellow, blue, and black astronaut minifigures (blue and black are new to me, and were new for 1984), an axle piece inside the rocket to hold the rocket together, and studless tiles for sliding the launchpad assembly.
The three minifigures, situated in and around the two completed vehicles: a jet scooter on top, and a plane on bottom. The scooter needs a pair of black cylindrical exhaust pieces, which are missing and will need to be acquired via Lego enthusiast sites later. The plane will be launched from a launchpad that is part of the base infrastructure.