White: 1983 Ferrari 512 BBi

$268,800 USD | Sold

 

Red: 1992 Ferrari F40

$3,855,000 USD | Sold

 

Black: 1995 Ferrari F512 M

$780,500 USD | Sold

 

Yellow: 1965 Ferrari 275 GTB/6C by Scaglietti

$2,810,000 USD | Sold

 

---

 

1983 Ferrari 512 BBi

In 1981, Ferrari updated the 512 Berlinetta Boxer with a fuel-injected version of the venerable flat-12 engine that delivered a dividend of an additional 20 pound-feet of torque. Capable of reaching 60 mph from standstill in 4.7 seconds and a top speed of 174 mph, the 512 BBi primarily remained a European-delivery model due to emissions standards in the United States, although an official federalization program eventually eased the import process for American buyers. By the time the BBi was supplanted by the Testarossa in 1984, just 1,007 examples were built; the model remains a favorite of many enthusiasts who treasure its careful development from the roaring 512 racecars of the early 1970s.

 

Chassis number 44993 is one of approximately 27 examples appointed with a special interior design by Italian fashion house Ermenegildo Zegna, a unique treatment of wool seat and door inserts with complementary carpeting that was available in several colors. Here, the Ferrari was finished in a stunning color combination of white paint over a cream leather interior with red wool inserts and carpets, and it was equipped with air conditioning and the special Pioneer stereo system with proprietary equalizer. The 512 was reportedly owned by the family of the original buyer through 1996, when it was acquired by John Anton of Minnesota, who retained possession for two decades while treating the car to a life of modest driving use and dutiful upkeep.

 

Sold to a third owner in 2016, the BBi was treated to a cosmetic restoration in the original color combination that reportedly included a refurbishment of the original Cromodora wheels, which were shod with proper metric Michelin TRX tires. The car was then exhibited at the Cavallino Classic in early 2017.

 

As reflected by invoices on file, the Ferrari received a significant bout of mechanical work in 2018 from the respected Foreign Cars Italia in Greensboro, North Carolina, including a comprehensive engine-out belt service costing nearly $12,000. Acquired by the consignor in January 2019, the 512 has since been maintained as needed by Ferrari of Las Vegas, including clutch and electric system work performed in 2020 and 2021. It displays fewer than 33,600 kilometers (~20,880 miles) at time of cataloguing.

 

Offered with a toolkit and owner’s manual, radio manual, and dealer service booklet in the proper pouch, and documented with service invoices from 2018 to 2021, this sparingly driven 512 is a particularly fetching example of the final Berlinetta Boxer. It is further distinguished by the rare and sumptuous Zegna interior livery. Ideal for any enthusiast of modern Ferraris, this beautiful BBi would make a distinctive addition to any marque gathering or supercar collection, poised for further display at FCA events or enjoyment on the open road.

 

---

 

1992 Ferrari F40

Engineered to celebrate the 40th anniversary of Maranello’s first model, the 125 S, the F40 to this day remains one of Ferrari’s most captivating and impressively specified supercars. The model was originally conceived to be an FIA Group B competitor, and it was consequently developed from the superlative 288 GTO to take on the likes of the Porsche 959. Enthusiasts can be grateful that the F40’s nearly stillborn gestation continued forward even after the racing class was canceled. Rather than scrap the program entirely, Ferrari used the five initial 288 GTO Evoluzione examples as the basis of a new 40th-anniversary road car that would be the last supercar devised under Enzo Ferrari’s stewardship.

 

As it was designed for competition purposes, the F40 featured a race-developed steel tube-frame chassis with four-wheel double-wishbone independent suspension, coil-over Koni shock absorbers, and four-caliper ventilated disc brakes. Leonardo Fioravanti’s coachwork design, which was aerodynamically perfected in Pininfarina’s wind tunnel, was built with paneling woven of Kevlar and carbon fiber, reducing the curb weight by approximately 20 percent while simultaneously tripling the car’s structural rigidity.

 

The 288’s twin-turbocharged V-8 was bored to displace 2.9 liters and equipped with IHI turbochargers and Behr intercoolers; this powerplant was married to a five-speed transaxle actuated by a gated shifter. The resulting performance was nothing short of astounding, as the type F120 040 engine developed 478 horsepower and 425 pound-feet of torque, capable of launching the F40 to 60 mph from standstill in just 3.8 seconds and achieving a top speed of 201 mph (thereby eclipsing the Porsche 959 and Lamborghini Countach).

 

Cosmetically, the F40 amply reflected its basis in racecar development, with the lightweight body echoed by numerous interior considerations. Weight was further reduced with the use of cloth upholstery on plastic-composite racing seats, pull-strap door releases, drilled pedals, and Perspex windows.

 

Publicly introduced at the 1987 Frankfurt Motor Show, the F40 was initially earmarked for a low production run of 400 examples, but skyrocketing customer interest prompted Ferrari to ultimately build 1,315 cars. The commemorative supercar was initially only available in Europe, and early examples were built without catalytic converters or adjustable suspensions. In 1990, deliveries of a more developed version began in the United States; these were standard-equipped with air-conditioning and catalytic converters. By the model’s production conclusion in summer 1992, just 213 examples had been specified and delivered to America, and it remains notable for being the last supercar developed under the watchful eyes of Il Commendatore himself, the legendary Enzo Ferrari.

 

Occupying such an important position in Maranello’s supercar lineage, it is hardly surprising that many F40 examples were initially purchased by astute collectors and largely restricted to showroom viewing and concours exhibition. Relatively few cars were driven in anger on a track, but a handful of drivers were lucky enough to experience the F40 under such conditions.

 

Case in point, five-time Le Mans champion Derek Bell was allowed to push the car’s limits during a test drive for Classic & Sports Car magazine conducted during the mid-2000s. His verdict: “It’s just magnificent…This is a car to make your hair curl. The power delivery is sensational, and I love the way the turbos come on with such a rush. Very quickly the situation changes from neutral understeer to amazing oversteer, but it’s all superbly predictable.”

 

But the endorsement of a pedigreed championship driver was no requirement for the F40 to attract an ardent fanbase, as illustrated by an entire generation of teenage gearheads who proudly displayed posters of the 40th anniversary supercar on their walls. Many of these same children have grown up to be today’s respected collectors, and their continued devotion to the F40 testifies to just how iconic the seminal model truly is.

 

This desirably documented and modestly driven F40 is one of the finest examples to be publicly offered in recent memory. One of just 60 examples delivered to the United States in 1992, chassis number 91097 completed assembly in September 1991, finished in Rosso Corsa and trimmed with Stoffa Vigogna (vicuña cloth) seat upholstery. According to a copy of an original window sticker on file, the car was shipped for import to Newark, New Jersey, and an entry in the F40’s warranty booklet demonstrates the car was distributed for retail to Monterey Ferrari in Seaside, California, just north of Pebble Beach.

 

Officially sold in October 1991, the Ferrari was delivered in January 1992 to the first owner, Putra Masagung of Hillsborough, California. The impressive supercar passed through one other California-based ownership over the following 13 years before being acquired circa late 2005 by another enthusiast in California. Throughout this period, the F40 enjoyed steady maintenance and gradually accrued occasional miles before being sold to the consignor more recently.

 

In February 2020 the F40 was issued certification from Ferrari Classiche, including a Certificate of Authenticity and a Red Book that clarifies the car desirably retains its major original mechanical equipment, including engine and gearbox, and is equipped to proper factory specifications. The Ferrari was also issued a Classiche Libretto Manutenzione, a Classiche-issued maintenance log that is stamped with a factory-conducted service at that time. In preparation for the current offering, the supercar was serviced in February 2022, as reflected by an invoice on file from Ferrari Los Angeles. This attention included a belt service, a rebuild of the fuel injectors and alternator, and a re-sealing of the valve covers with new gaskets and rings. The phase sensors were replaced, the wheels were re-torqued, and a new fuel filter and spark plugs were installed.

 

Still benefiting from the gentle care of four faithful custodians, this F40 displays the preservative effects of many years in California, and it displays 9,447 miles at time of cataloguing. It is fitted with a Tubi exhaust (though still accompanied by the original factory unit) and shod with correct Pirelli P-Zero tires.

 

The celebrated Ferrari presents very well cosmetically, and the Red Book certification assures the car is mechanically numbers-matching. Accompanied by a toolkit in pouch, owner’s manuals in the familiar beige leather pouch, and a can of factory-branded fix-a-flat, it is documented with the window sticker copy, warranty booklet, Ferrari Classiche Red Book, and an invoice for the recent servicing. This wonderful F40 should command the attention of any supercar enthusiast or marque aficionado, offering a future highlight to any collection of advanced top-shelf sports cars.

 

---

 

1995 Ferrari F512 M

The Ferrari F512 M, or “Modificata,” was launched in 1994 as the final version of the legendary Testarossa. Ultimately, it was to be the last flat-12-powered Ferrari produced. The marque refined all aspects of the model’s development with particular attention paid to the chassis, engine, and cosmetics. Numerous internal engine upgrades, including titanium rods and other lightened components, along with increased compression, helped bump engine output to 446 horsepower—a boost of nearly 60 units up from the preceding 512 TR.

 

Coupled with refinements such as a new stainless exhaust, updated suspension, and a new Bosch ABS braking system, the F512 M offers impressive power and fantastic handling assisted by a near 50:50 weight distribution. Styling cues enhancing the model’s design include a unique set of taillights, three-piece alloy wheels, and a completely revised front fascia which combined the striking lines of the F40 and 512 BB/LM. In total, just 501 F512 M examples were manufactured for worldwide distribution, making it one of the rarest road-going models of Luca di Montezemolo's reign at Ferrari.

 

MODIFICATA NUMERO SESSANTOTTO

 

This “triple black” F512 M on offer is the 68th of just 75 US-market examples of the model produced by Ferrari. Just four examples of those 75 US cars are recorded to have been specified in this color combination. Having been completed at Maranello in late October 1995, it was thusly distributed to Ferrari of North America in Montvale, New Jersey for dealer assignment. By 8 December it was procured by Algar Ferrari of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and promptly sold to its first Pennsylvania-based owner. The car’s accompanying window sticker and original sales documentation from 31 January 1996 show that its first owner further specified a suite of dealer-installed accessories, including a pair of black floormats bearing the famous “Cavallino Rampante” logo in red, an alarm system, and a hi-fi stereo system with amplifier, CD player, and set of MB Quart speakers.

 

Modificata number 68 remained with its original owner until 8 July 2008, when it was acquired by the consignor in a deal brokered by Algar Ferrari. Documentation and invoices on file show that Algar Ferrari were exclusively responsible for the car’s maintenance up to that point—and also that its odometer then indicated just 8,003 miles at time of sale.

 

In April 2010, the consignor engaged Ferrari of New England to complete some minor sorting of the air conditioning system and recalibrate the engine-speed sensor/tachometer. All told, this F512 M has since lived an exceptionally pampered life under the consignor’s careful stewardship, and it now exhibits just under 9,000 miles at time of cataloguing. In April 2022, the consignor again submitted this well-kept Modificata to Ferrari of New England for a comprehensive servicing regimen, which included a major engine-out belt service, plugs, points, gaskets, filters, and four new Michelin Pilot Sport tires to the cost of $21,987.

 

As the most exciting and refined iteration of the Testarossa platform, the F512 M is considered by many to be the most desirable model in the series. A very rare sight in the United States, they remain highly collectible and prized for all their unique qualities. Featuring just two recorded owners from new and fewer than 9,000 miles on its odometer, this would be an excellent example for the individual looking to enjoy the thrills of flat-12 Ferrari ownership on the open road.

 

---

 

1965 Ferrari 275 GTB/6C by Scaglietti

GIVE IT TWICE AS MANY

 

At the Paris Salon in October 1964, Ferrari unveiled the replacement for the 250 GT platform. Powered by a 3.3-liter development of the long-running “Colombo” short-block V-12 engine, the 275 GTB was clothed in Pininfarina-designed and Scaglietti-built coachwork that bore more than a passing resemblance to the celebrated 250 GTO. The model was the first Ferrari road car to feature independent rear suspension and a five-speed transaxle, as well as the GTB (Grand Touring Berlinetta) nomenclature that remains in use today.

 

Only a year after the 275 GTB’s 1964 debut, a second series was unveiled that featured a longer nose, a modification intended to aid aerodynamic downforce at high speeds. By October 1966 the twin-cam engine was replaced with a four-cam arrangement, and the prior model became regarded as a distinct entity, produced in a modest quantity of just 454 examples, of which the early short-nose (first series) design accounted for slightly more than half.

 

While a majority of these early 275s were equipped with the standard three-carburetor manifold, six carburetors were, in fact, optioned on a relatively small number of cars. Considered the very best of the best, these six-carburetor (6C) short-nose examples are now regarded as the purest and most powerful iteration of the striking 275 GTB, and they are prized by today’s enthusiasts and found in exceptional collections the world over.

 

275 GTB/6C BERLINETTA 06779

 

This beautifully maintained six-carburetor 275 benefits from a well-documented chain of ownership that includes just two owners since new. According to the research of marque expert Dyke Ridgley, chassis number 06779 is one of approximately 60 short-nose 275 GTB’s originally equipped with six carburetors.

 

Originally finished in the handsome shade of Rosso Cina over a cockpit trimmed in beige Connolly leather, this short-nose GTB was further specified with standard steel bodywork, left-hand drive, and instrumentation in miles. The car was “completed” at the factory on 24 February, with an additional note specifying that the six-carb setup was added two weeks later on 15 March. 06779 departed Maranello with that desirable upgrade and had passed through Chinetti on to its first recorded owner—the Canadian retail heir John Craig George Eaton II—by late May 1965.

 

Eaton greatly enjoyed this impressive berlinetta for several years until around 1970, by which time he had it removed to storage then indicating approximately 24,000 miles. Interestingly, Massini notes that the car’s storage location was, in fact, the racing offices for John Craig’s brother George Ross Eaton, Canada’s first full-time Formula One driver (with BRM) and proprietor of George Eaton Racing.

 

LIFE WITH THE CONSIGNOR; OWNER NUMBER TWO

 

The car would remain in a state of static display until 1997, when Eaton sold it to the consignor in a deal brokered by Ferrari of Ontario. Part of the sales agreement on file notes that 06779 was to be completely restored by the dealer, and so the next four years were spent returning this fascinating 275 GTB/6C to a state befitting its formidable factory specifications. At this time, its original color scheme was replaced by its present Giallo Fly exterior and Pelle Beige leather upholstery. Freshly reborn and entirely road-ready, the consignor first took possession of 06779 upon completion of its exhaustive restoration in late 2001, then indicating just shy of 24,900 miles.

 

The consignor initially procured much enjoyment from his ownership experience by driving this freshly restored car, but after a move to Arizona in 2005, he subsequently decided that 06779 was such an important prize that he had it installed for static display in his living room for the next 17 years.

 

Recent research has shown that at some point in the distant past, possibly as early as when the car was handled new by Chinetti, the identity of 06779 and 07177 were swapped by someone outside of the factory. Both were sold new by Chinetti, and both were born a shade of red with beige interior and six carburetors. The original 07177 headed out to the US West Coast while the original 06779 was sold new to Mr. Eaton in Canada. However, it was uncovered much later on that each car had been superficially stamped with the other’s identity. Half of this mystery was rectified in 2010, when the Belgian owner of the original 07177 brought the car to Ferrari Classiche (then stamped as 06779) and confirmed that all its equipment matched Ferrari’s internal records for the components recorded in chassis 07177, and its identity was properly returned to original.

 

After confirming the situation with Ferrari, the consignor similarly returned our subject lot to Ferrari Classiche headquarters in Maranello in early 2022 so that they could issue a Classiche Red Book and properly return the car to its original identity. Accordingly, 06779’s major components were certified as those bearing the correct “internal” numbers, and its Ferrari Classiche Red Book confirms it to be a full numbers-matching 275 GTB/6C, with its identity now correctly restored to 06779.

 

Just prior to this sale, 06779 has been returned to its high-performance 6C specification and fully certified by Ferrari Classiche. Chassis number 06779 is a rarified 275 GTB that is truly worthy of inclusion in any of the world’s most exclusive Ferrari collections. Having just two owners since 1965 and offered today with an additional set of Campagnolo “starburst” alloy wheels, tools, manuals, circa 1997 restoration invoices, and new Classiche Red book, this stunning berlinetta would be a brilliant car to drive and enjoy—and one that would surely attract plenty of attention at the world’s most exclusive concours events.

---

Kristina and I headed over to RM Sotheby's at the Monterey Conference Center to view some glorious cars at their auction preview.

- - -

Had a blast with our auto-enthusiast friend and neighbor, Fred, at Monterey Car Week 2022.

U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jarrod Konz, a fuels specialist, Tech. Sgt. Daniel Hall, an aircrew egress systems specialist, and Tech. Sgt. Bryan Henry, an aircraft electrical and environmental systems specialist, all assigned to the Ohio Air National Guard’s 180th Fighter Wing, work together to assemble a GBU-31 guided air-to-surface weapon during Agile Combat Employment training at the 180FW in Swanton, Ohio, Jan. 11, 2023. ACE allows Airmen to widen capabilities by training in adjacent career fields, creating Multi-Capable Airmen that can operate in a contested, degraded and operationally limited environment. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Airman 1st Class Sarah Stalder Lundgren)

Imperial Japanese Aircraft Carrier list in USS Yorktown CV10's Hanger at Patriots Point Naval & Maritime Museum in Mount Pleasant, SC on May-21st-2019. Their Service and Fate's are listed below.

 

Hōshō (鳳翔, literally "phoenix flying") was the world's first commissioned ship that was built as an aircraft carrier, and the first aircraft carrier of the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN). Commissioned in 1922, the ship was used for testing carrier aircraft operations equipment, techniques, such as take-offs and landings, and carrier aircraft operational methods and tactics. The ship provided valuable lessons and experience for the IJN in early carrier air operations. Hōshō's superstructure and other obstructions to the flight deck were removed in 1924 on the advice of experienced aircrews.

 

Hōshō and her aircraft group participated in the Shanghai Incident in 1932 and in the opening stages of the Sino-Japanese War in late 1937. During those two conflicts, the carrier's aircraft supported Imperial Japanese Army ground operations and engaged in aerial combat with aircraft of the Nationalist Chinese Air Force. The small size of the ship and her assigned airgroups (usually around 15 aircraft) limited the effectiveness of her contributions to combat operations. As a result, the carrier was placed in reserve after her return to Japan from China and she became a training ship in 1939.

 

During World War II, Hōshō participated in the Battle of Midway in June 1942 in a secondary role. After the battle, the carrier resumed her training role in Japanese home waters for the duration of the conflict and survived the war with only minor damage from air attacks. She was surrendered to the Allies at the end of the war and used to repatriate Japanese troops until she was scrapped in 1946.

 

Construction of a seaplane carrier was authorized by the Japanese government in its "eight-six" fleet program of 1918 l A planned sister ship, named Shokaku, was cancelled in 1922 before any construction started.[Hōshō was the second warship, after the British HMS Hermes, to be built from the keel up as an aircraft carrier, but was launched and completed earlier than Hermes.

 

Hōshō was initially designed as a seaplane carrier like HMS Campania with a forward flying-off deck, 32 aircraft, four low-angle 14-centimeter (5.5 in) guns, and four anti-aircraft (AA) guns. The plan was revised after reports were received from Japanese observers with the Royal Navy in Europe about the desirability to be able to land aircraft on the ship. The new requirements were modeled on HMS Furious after she received her rear flight deck in 1918. The ship was to be capable of 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph) and fitted with a forward flight deck, island and funnels amidships, and a large hangar aft. Shortly thereafter based on observations of landing trials on Furious and HMS Argus, the world's first flush-decked aircraft carrier, Hōshō's flight deck design was revised in April 1919. The island was removed and the funnels were moved to one side to create an unobstructed, full-length flight deck, and the ship was reclassified as an aircraft carrier. The ship's hull was based on that of a large cruiser and she was given a small island. Her three funnels were mounted on the starboard side and swiveled to lie horizontal during flight operations. Hōshō's designed speed was reduced to 25 knots (46 km/h; 29 mph), based on British experiences during World War I.[6]

  

Hōshō was completed with an overall length of 168.25 meters (552 ft). She had a beam of 17.98 meters (59 ft) and a mean draft of 6.17 meters (20 ft 3 in). The ship displaced 7,470 long tons (7,590 t) at standard load, and 9,494 long tons (9,646 t) at normal load. Her crew totaled 512 officers and men.[7] The ship was almost completely unarmored.[8]

  

Hōshō had two Parsons geared turbine sets with a total of 30,000 shaft horsepower (22,000 kW) driving two propeller shafts. Eight Kampon Type B water-tube boilers with a working pressure of 18.3 kg/cm2 (1,790 kPa; 260 psi) and a temperature of 138 °C (280 °F) provided steam to the turbines, although only four were oil-fired. The other four used a mix of oil and coal. The ship's designed speed was 25 knots, but she made 26.66 knots (49.37 km/h; 30.68 mph) from 31,117 shp (23,204 kW) on her sea trials on 30 November 1922. She carried 2,700 long tons (2,700 t) of fuel oil and 940 long tons (960 t) of coal, an extraordinary total for such a small ship, to give her a range of 8,680 nautical miles (16,080 km; 9,990 mi) at 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph).[9]

 

To reduce rolling and increase stability for aircraft operations, a gyrostabilizer produced by the American Sperry Gyroscope Company was installed. The installation initially proved unreliable as the Japanese technicians were badly trained by Sperry, but eventually the system proved its worth as the technicians gained experience.[9]

  

Hōshō's flight deck was 168.25 meters (552 ft) long and 22.62 meters (74 ft 3 in) wide. The forward end sloped down at an angle of −5° to help aircraft accelerate during takeoff. A small island was mounted well forward on the starboard side and contained the ship's bridge and air-operations control center. The island was fitted with a small tripod mast intended to carry the ship's fire-control system. Fifteen different types of arresting gear were evaluated before the British longitudinal wire system was adopted. Low landing speeds of the time meant that aircraft had little difficulty in stopping, but their light weight made them vulnerable to wind gusts that could blow them over the side of the carrier, and the longitudinal wires helped to prevent that. Forward of the island was a collapsible crane for loading aircraft into the forward hangar.

 

The flight deck, unlike those on Royal Navy carriers, was superimposed on the ship's hull rather than constructed as a strength deck supporting the carrier's hull structure. A system of lights and mirrors along the flight deck assisted pilots in landing on the carrier.

 

Hōshō was the only Japanese aircraft carrier with two hangars. The forward hangar was 67.2 by 9.5 meters (220 ft 6 in by 31 ft 2 in) and only one deck in height as it was intended to house nine small aircraft, such as fighters. The two-story rear hangar measured 16.5 by 14 meters (54 ft 2 in by 45 ft 11 in) at the forward end and 29.4 by 12 meters (96 ft 5 in by 39 ft 4 in) at the rear end. It was designed to house six large aircraft, such as torpedo bombers, as well as six reserve aircraft. Each hangar was served by an aircraft elevator. The forward elevator was 10.35 by 7.86 meters (34.0 by 25.8 ft) and the aft elevator measured 13.71 by 6.34 meters (45 ft 0 in by 20 ft 10 in).[12]

  

Hōshō had a normal capacity of fifteen aircraft, subject to the limitations of her hangars. She was first commissioned with an air group of nine Mitsubishi 1MF (Type 10) fighters and three to six Mitsubishi B1M3 (Type 13) torpedo bombers. In 1928, the fighters were replaced by the A1N1 (Type 3). Three years later the air group consisted of Nakajima A2N (Type 90) fighters and Mitsubishi B2M (Type 89) torpedo bombers. In 1938 Nakajima A4N (Type 95) fighters and Yokosuka B3Y (Type 92) bombers flew from the ship. In 1940 the air group was modernized with Mitsubishi A5M (Type 96) "Claude" fighters and Yokosuka B4Y1 (Type 96) "Jean" bombers.

 

Hōshō was armed with four 50-caliber 14 cm/50 3rd Year Type guns, two on each side. The two forward guns had a firing arc of 150°, including straight ahead, while the rear guns could fire 120° on either side.[15] They fired 38-kilogram (84 lb) projectiles at a rate of six to ten rounds per minute with a muzzle velocity of about 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s); at 35°, they had a maximum range of 19,750 m (21,600 yd). A heavy gun armament was provided for Hōshō; as carrier doctrine was just evolving at this time, the impracticability of carriers engaging in gun duels had not yet been realized. Her large flight deck and lack of armor made her a vulnerable target in surface battles.

 

A pair of 40-caliber 8 cm/40 3rd Year Type guns on retractable mounts provided Hōshō's only anti-aircraft defense. They were positioned on the flight deck, just forward of the rear elevator. These guns fired 5.67–5.99-kilogram (12.5–13.2 lb) projectiles at a muzzle velocity of about 680 m/s (2,231 ft/s); at 45°, this provided a maximum range of 10,800 meters (11,800 yd), and they had a maximum ceiling of 7,200 meters (23,600 ft) at 75° elevation. Their effective rate of fire was 13 to 20 rounds per minute.[18]

  

Hōshō was laid down by the Asano Shipbuilding Company in Tsurumi-ku, Yokohama, on 16 December 1920. She was launched on 13 November 1921 and towed to Yokosuka Naval Arsenal for completion on 10 January 1922. Hōshō was delayed by repeated design changes and late deliveries of equipment, pushing the commissioning date from March to 27 December 1922. She was commissioned lacking much of her aviation equipment, and did not begin landing trials until 22 February 1923. The first landings were made by British pilots under contract, who were quickly replaced by Japanese pilots trained by the British Aviation Mission. After Hōshō was commissioned, experienced aircrews requested changes, and the ship was modified by the shipyard from 6 June to 20 August 1924. The island, tripod mast, and aircraft crane were removed since they partially obstructed the flight deck and obscured pilot visibility. The forward part of the flight deck was made horizontal, and the 8 cm AA guns were moved forward, close to the position of the former island and out of the way of landing operations.Another reason for removal of the island was that the IJN found that it was too small and cramped to be of effective use in controlling air operations or conning the ship. After the island was removed, the carrier's flight operations were controlled from a platform extending from the side of the flight deck, a design that would be repeated in subsequent Japanese aircraft carriers.] The ship was then assigned to the 1st Fleet until 15 November 1924.

 

Hōshō was fitted with a net used as a barricade aft of the forward elevator between 10 March and 2 July 1925. It was intended to prevent landing aircraft from colliding with aircraft preparing to take off, and stop them from falling into the open elevator well. The barrier was hydraulically operated and could be erected in three seconds.

 

As the first of her kind, Hōshō provided valuable experience and insight into carrier air operations for the IJN. The ship was used for testing aircraft and equipment, particularly various types of arresting gear and optical landing aids. The lessons learned influenced the design and construction of Ryūjō and the subsequent conversions of battlecruiser Akagi and battleship Kaga into aircraft carriers. Hōshō was actively used to develop carrier operational methods and tactics for the IJN during the 1920s. She was assigned to the First Carrier Division with Akagi on 1 April 1928. During the 1930s Hōshō was fitted with three different types of transverse arresting gear for trials.

  

Along with Kaga, Hōshō was assigned to the First Carrier Division and sent to China during the Shanghai Incident that began in January 1932. Operating with the Third Fleet, Hōshō arrived at the mouth of the Yangtze River on 1 February. Her aircraft participated in the IJN's first aerial combat on 5 February when three fighters, escorting two attack aircraft, were engaged by nine Chinese fighters over Shanghai; one Chinese fighter was damaged, although the Japanese pilots made no claim. Two days later, the two carriers sent some of their aircraft to Kunda Airfield where they flew ground attack missions in support of the Imperial Japanese Army. Between 23 and 26 February, Kaga and Hōshō bombers attacked Chinese airfields at Hangzhou and Suzhou, destroying a number of Chinese aircraft on the ground. On 26 February, six fighters from Hōshō, escorting nine attack aircraft from Kaga on one of the bombing raids, shot down three of five Chinese fighters that engaged them. The First Carrier Division rejoined the Combined Fleet on 20 March, after a ceasefire had been declared on 3 March.

 

Hōshō participated in the Combined Fleet Maneuvers of 1935 during which she was attached to the IJN Fourth Fleet. Caught in a typhoon on 23 September, the carrier and a number of other Japanese ships were badly damaged in what was referred to as the "Fourth Fleet incident.The ship's forward flight deck collapsed and part had to be cut away before the carrier could proceed to Yokosuka for repairs. The Fourth Fleet incident and the Tomozuru Incident of 1934, in which a top-heavy torpedo boat capsized in heavy weather, caused the Japanese command to investigate the stability of all their ships, resulting in a number of design changes to improve stability and increase hull strength.

 

While the Hōshō was at the dockyard between 22 November 1935 and 31 March 1936, her stability was improved; the forward flight deck's supports were reinforced and increased in number; the ship's AA guns, aircraft crane and upper deck aviation fuel tanks were removed; the funnels were fixed in the horizontal position with their mouths angled slightly downwards; the front sides of Hōshō's forward hangar and bridge were reinforced; and the ship's hull was reinforced in the vicinity of her rear hangar to increase her longitudinal strength. At full load, her metacentric height after these changes was 1.11 meters (3 ft 8 in). Six twin 13.2 mm Type 93 Hotchkiss machine guns were also fitted.

  

During the Sino-Japanese War, Hōshō rejoined the Third Fleet and supported land operations of the army in Central China in August 1937 with Ryūjō, later joined by Kaga. The three carriers carried a total of 90 aircraft to the conflict in China, including 15 from Hōshō, 27 on Ryūjō, and the rest with Kaga. Details of the activities of Hōshō's aircraft are scarce, but three of the ship's Nakajima A2N fighters shot down a Martin B-10 bomber on 25 July.

 

The carrier returned to Japan to refuel on 1 September and then sailed to the South China coast, accompanied by Ryūjō, and began operations against Chinese forces near Canton, now Guangzhou, on 21 September. That day, Hōshō contributed six fighters to escort bombers attacking airfields and the combined force encountered seven Curtiss Hawk III fighters, shooting down two, in addition to a pair of observation planes, for no combat losses of their own. Five of the Japanese fighters ran out of fuel during the return flight and had to ditch in the sea, although the aircrews were rescued. A followup air strike that afternoon was unsuccessfully attacked by the five remaining Hawks, at the cost of one of their own. The Japanese pilots claimed to have shot down sixteen enemy aircraft and an additional probable loss during the day's fighting. Hōshō and Ryūjō returned to the Shanghai area on 3 October and Hōshō's aircraft were temporarily transferred to Kunda airfield to support ground operations. On 17 October, the carrier transferred all of her aircraft to Ryūjō and returned to Japan where she was placed in reserve on 1 December.

 

During this time, her aircraft elevators were enlarged in 1939: the forward elevator to 12.8 by 8.5 meters (42 by 28 ft) and the rear elevator to 13.7 by 7 meters (45 by 23 ft). On 12 August 1939 Hōshō was deemed useful as a training carrier and, in critical battles, as a platform for A4N1 (Type 95) fighters and B4Y1 (Type 96) torpedo bombers, for as long as those planes remained serviceable. A later investigation determined on 23 December 1940 that she could not operate the latest aircraft types like the Mitsubishi A6M Zero, the Aichi D3A "Val", or the Nakajima B5N "Kate" in combat. Also, the small size of the carrier's airgroup limited the ship's potential value to the fleet in any future conflicts.

  

Hōshō began the Pacific War in the Third Carrier Division assigned to the 1st Fleet under Vice Admiral Shirō Takasu. The carrier, captained by Kaoru Umetani, was tasked along with Zuihō to provide air support, including scouting, anti-submarine patrols, and combat air patrol for the Combined Fleet's "Main Body" battle-line of six battleships: Nagato, Mutsu, Fusō, Yamashiro, Ise, and Hyūga. With the Main Body, Hōshō sortied from the Inland Sea on 7 December 1941 to provide distant cover for the carrier forces under Chūichi Nagumo which were attacking Pearl Harbor. The battleship force turned back 300 nautical miles (556 km) east of Japan, but Hōshō became separated on 10 December due to radio silence restrictions while conducting anti-submarine air operations. The ship lost contact because she had launched aircraft near dusk to investigate a submarine sighting. The aircraft returned after dark and landed safely after the carrier turned on its lights. In order to recover the aircraft, however, the carrier and her three escorting destroyers had to steam east and therefore lost sight of the Main Body in the darkness. There does not appear to have been any US or other enemy submarines in Japanese waters at this time. The carrier was located by scout aircraft the next day 500 nautical miles (926 km) east of the Main Body and returned to port at Kure on 12 December.

 

On 29 May 1942, Hōshō sortied from Japan with the rest of the fleet for the operation which resulted in the Battle of Midway, providing modest air protection, scouting, and anti-submarine support for the Main Body, now consisting of the battleships Yamato, Nagato, and Mutsu. Her aircraft complement for the operation consisted of eight obsolete Yokosuka B4Y "Jean" torpedo bombers.

 

With the Main Body trailing 300 nautical miles (556 km) behind the carrier striking force, Hōshō missed the major portion of the battle in which Nagumo's four fleet carriers were ambushed and fatally damaged by US carrier aircraft on 4 June. The next day, the carrier's aircraft helped guide the remnants of Nagumo's force to a rendezvous with the Main Body as well helped other Japanese warships to rendezvous during and after the battle, including the cruiser Sendai. Around the same time, one of Hōshō's aircraft discovered the burning, sinking Hiryū. Photographs of the abandoned carrier have been described as "among the most dramatic of the war in the Pacific". The observer aboard the aircraft also reported seeing survivors left behind on Hiryū so the destroyer Tanikaze was sent to unsuccessfully search for the wrecked carrier With the battle lost, a significant strategic defeat for Japan, the carrier returned to Japan with the rest of the fleet, arriving at the Hashirajima anchorage on 14 June.

  

After her return to Japan, Hōshō was transferred to the Third Fleet, unofficially assigned to the training fleet (later called the Mobile Force Training Force), and officially assigned in October. She conducted flight training in the Inland Sea for aircraft that flew in from shore bases, since no aircraft were based onboard Hōshō. On 15 January 1943, the 50th Air Flotilla was created for carrier aircrew training and both Hōshō and Ryūhō were assigned to the new unit. The two ships provided carrier landing training and served as target ships for torpedo training. In January 1944, Hōshō was reassigned to the 12th Air Fleet, then to the Combined Fleet, but continued to perform the same mission of training fleet carrier pilots in the Inland Sea. In this role, Hōshō shuttled back and forth between Kure and the Western Inland Sea, spending equal amounts of time at each location.

  

In order to service new and larger aircraft like the Nakajima B6N "Jill" torpedo bomber and the Yokosuka D4Y "Judy" dive bomber, the flight deck was extended over 6 meters (19 ft 8 in) at each end to a total length of 180.8 meters (593 ft 2 in) from 27 March to 26 April 1944. Hōshō also received new arresting gear and a new crash barrier. The additional weight high up in the ship adversely affected her stability and she was restricted from operations in bad weather lest she capsize. At some point during the war the ship's 14 cm guns were removed and she received about twenty 25-millimeter Type 96 autocannons in single mounts.They fired .25-kilogram (0.55 lb) projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s); at 50°, this provided a maximum range of 7,500 meters (8,202 yd), and an effective ceiling of 5,500 meters (18,000 ft). The 15-round magazines needed to be changed frequently, and the maximum effective rate of fire was only between 110 and 120 rounds per minute.

 

After her return to Japan, Hōshō was transferred to the Third Fleet, unofficially assigned to the training fleet (later called the Mobile Force Training Force), and officially assigned in October. She conducted flight training in the Inland Sea for aircraft that flew in from shore bases, since no aircraft were based onboard Hōshō. On 15 January 1943, the 50th Air Flotilla was created for carrier aircrew training and both Hōshō and Ryūhō were assigned to the new unit. The two ships provided carrier landing training and served as target ships for torpedo training. In January 1944, Hōshō was reassigned to the 12th Air Fleet, then to the Combined Fleet, but continued to perform the same mission of training fleet carrier pilots in the Inland Sea. In this role, Hōshō shuttled back and forth between Kure and the Western Inland Sea, spending equal amounts of time at each location.

  

Hōshō with her extended and widened flight deck, photographed in October 1945

In order to service new and larger aircraft like the Nakajima B6N "Jill" torpedo bomber and the Yokosuka D4Y "Judy" dive bomber, the flight deck was extended over 6 meters (19 ft 8 in) at each end to a total length of 180.8 meters (593 ft 2 in) from 27 March to 26 April 1944. Hōshō also received new arresting gear and a new crash barrier. The additional weight high up in the ship adversely affected her stability and she was restricted from operations in bad weather lest she capsize. At some point during the war the ship's 14 cm guns were removed and she received about twenty 25-millimeter Type 96 autocannons in single mounts. They fired .25-kilogram (0.55 lb) projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s); at 50°, this provided a maximum range of 7,500 meters (8,202 yd), and an effective ceiling of 5,500 meters (18,000 ft). The 15-round magazines needed to be changed frequently, and the maximum effective rate of fire was only between 110 and 120 rounds per minute.

 

After the modifications, Hōshō continued to provide training to navy pilots in the Inland Sea, including acting as a target ship for torpedo training. At 05:30 on 19 March 1945, possibly while berthed at Kure, the carrier was caught in an air raid by carrier aircraft from the United States Task Force 58. Hōshō's flight deck was damaged by three bomb hits which killed six crewmen. Emergency repairs were made and her captain was ordered to keep her in readiness on 10 April. However, this order was revoked two days later and the carrier became a "4th reserve ship" with most of her crew transferred elsewhere. Hōshō was taken out of reserve as a "special guard ship" on 1 June and many of her crew were transferred back. During this time, the ship remained moored and camouflaged off Nishinomishima at Kure.

 

Hōshō was slightly damaged by a single bomb or aerial rocket hit when the Allies attacked Kure again on 24 July 1945. Information is scarce on the extent of the ship's involvement in the action, but it appears the carrier's participation was minimal, as she embarked no aircraft at the time. Hōshō was repaired within 15 days,although the ship relocated to Moji two days later.

 

The ship was turned over to Allied forces at the time of the surrender of Japan on 2 September and was stricken from the navy list on 5 October. Hōshō then served as a repatriation transport to retrieve Japanese servicemen and civilians stationed overseas and return them to Japan. In October and November 1945, accompanied by the cruiser Kashima, she carried 700 passengers from Wotje Atoll, 311 from Jaluit Atoll, and an undocumented number from Enewetak Atoll to Uraga, Kanagawa.

 

In December 1945, Hōshō's overhanging flight deck at the bow was cut off to improve visibility from the bridge and her hangars were modified to carry more passengers. Thereafter, she undertook more repatriation missions beginning with one to Wewak on 5 January 1946 and subsequent trips to China. In total, the carrier made nine repatriation trips before 15 August 1946 and transported about 40,000 passengers.[14][47] Hōshō was transferred to the Home Ministry on 31 August for disposal. She was scrapped in Osaka from 2 September 1946 to 1 May 1947 by the Kyōwa Shipbuilding Company.

 

IJN Akagi Was the lead ship of her Class of Imperial Japanese Navy Aircraft Battlecruiser/ Battleship Hybrid Carrier Conversions. Her Keel was laid down on December-6th-1920 at the Kure Naval Arsenal in Kure, Japan as the Second of the Amagi Class Class Battlecruisers.Work was underway on both Akagi and her Sister Amagi when Japan Signed the Washington Navy Treaty on February-6th-1922. This Treaty was signed by the Empire of Japan, the United Kingdom, The United States,the Kingdom of Italy and the French Third Republic. The treaty limited the construction of Battleships and Battlecruisers but allowed conversion of two battleship or battlecruiser hulls under construction into aircraft carriers of up to 33,000 long tons (34,000 t) displacement.After Japan launched her First Carrier Hōshō(Flying Phoenix) which was small given that she was the Very Aircraft Launched and Commissioned ,it was realized that a Larger class of Fleet Carriers were need. Amagi and Akagi was then Ordered to Be converted into Fleet Carriers. Construction resumed on the sisters under the 1924 Navy Budget. Akagi's Guns were turned over to the Imperial Japanese Army for use as coastal artillery; one of her main-gun turrets was installed on Iki Island in the Strait of Tsushima in 1932. The rest of her guns were placed in reserve and scrapped in 1943.

The Official Start of Construction of Akagi as an Aircraft Carrier began on November-19th-1943. Amagi was severely in the 1923 Great Kantō earthquake and was damaged beyond Economic Repair. Kaga( Increased Joy) a Toga Class Battleship was ordered to Be her replacement which I will cover Next. Akagi was Launched on April-22nd-1925.Fitting out Continued through late 1926. Sea trials begin in Winter 1927, and She was commissioned at Kure on March-25th-1927.

Since Akagi Was Originally Planned as a Battlecruiser, Japanese Ship Naming Conventions dictated her to be named after a Mountain in this Case Mount Akagi(Red Castle). Her name remained in contrast to Ships like Sōryū that since built Originally as Aircraft Carriers, which were named after Flying Creatures. She was the second ships of Her Name, the First was a Maya Class Gunboat.

Her completed length was 261.21 Meters

(857 ft) overall. She had a beam of 31 meters (101 ft 8 in) and, at deep load, a draft of 8.08 meters (26 ft 6 in). She displaced 26,900 long tons (27,300 t) at (standard) load, and 34,364 long tons (34,920 t) at full load, nearly 7,000 long tons (7,100 t) less than her designed displacement as a battlecruiser. Her complement totaled 1,600 crewmembers.

 

Akagi and her Converted Sister Kaga were the Only Carriers built with Superimposed Flight Decks.Athough the British Carriers Light Cruiser Conversions Glorious, Courageous, and Furious has two flight decks, There is No Evidence the Japanese Copied this Plan.

 

It is more likely that it was a case of convergent evolution to improve launch and recovery cycle flexibility by allowing simultaneous launch and recovery of aircraft. Akagi's main flight deck was 190.2 meters (624 ft 0 in) long and 30.5 meters (100 ft) wide, her middle flight deck (beginning right in front of the bridge) was only 15 meters (49 ft 3 in) long and her lower flight deck was 55.02 meters (180 ft 6 in) long. The utility of her middle flight deck was questionable as it was so short that only some lightly loaded aircraft could use it, even in an era when the aircraft were much lighter and smaller than during World War II.The upper flight deck sloped slightly from amidships toward the bow and toward the stern to assist landings and takeoffs for the underpowered aircraft of that time

 

As completed, the ship had two main hangar decks and a third auxiliary hangar, giving a total capacity of 60 aircraft. The third and lowest hangar deck was used only for storing disassembled aircraft. The two main hangars opened onto the middle and lower flight decks to allow aircraft to take off directly from the hangars while landing operations were in progress on the main flight deck above. The upper and middle hangar areas totaled about 80,375 square feet (7,467.1 m2), the lower hangar about 8,515 square feet (791.1 m2). No catapults were fitted. Her forward aircraft lift was offset to starboard and 11.8 by 13 meters (38 ft 9 in × 42 ft 8 in) in size. Her aft lift was on the centerline and 12.8 by 8.4 meters (42 ft 0 in × 27 ft 7 in). The aft elevator serviced the upper flight deck and all three hangar decks. Her arresting gear was an unsatisfactory British longitudinal system used on the carrier Furious that relied on friction between the arrester hook and the cables. The Japanese were well aware of this system's flaws, as it was already in use on their first carrier, Hōshō, but had no alternatives available when Akagi was completed. It was replaced during the ship's refit in 1931 with a Japanese-designed transverse cable system with six wires and that was replaced in turn before Akagi began her modernization in 1935 by the Kure Model 4 type (Kure shiki 4 gata). There was no island superstructure when the carrier was completed; the carrier was commanded from a space below the forward end of the upper flight deck.The ship carried approximately 150,000 US gallons (570,000 l) of aviation fuel for her embarked aircraft.

 

As originally completed, Akagi carried an air group of 28 Mitsubishi B1M3 torpedo bombers, 16 Nakajima A1N fighters and 16 Mitsubishi 2MR reconnaissance aircraft.

 

Akagi was armed with ten 50-caliber 20 cm 3rd Year Type No. 1 guns, six in casemates aft and the rest in two twin gun turrets, one on each side of the middle flight deck. They fired 110-kilogram (240 lb) projectiles at a rate of 3–6 rounds per minute with a muzzle velocity of 870 m/s (2,900 ft/s); at 25°, this provided a maximum range between 22,600 and 24,000 meters (24,700 and 26,200 yd). The turrets were nominally capable of 70° elevation to provide additional anti-aircraft fire, but in practice the maximum elevation was only 55°. The slow rate of fire and the fixed 5° loading angle minimized any real anti-aircraft capability.This heavy gun armament was provided in case she was surprised by enemy cruisers and forced to give battle, but her large and vulnerable flight deck, hangars, and superstructure made her more of a target in any surface action than a fighting warship. Carrier doctrine was still evolving at this time and the impracticality of carriers engaging in gun duels had not yet been realized.

 

The ship carried dedicated anti-aircraft armament of six twin 45-caliber 12 cm 10th Year Type gun mounts fitted on sponsons below the level of the funnels, where they could not fire across the flight deck, three mounts per side.These guns fired 20.3-kilogram (45 lb) projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 825–830 m/s (2,710–2,720 ft/s); at 45°, this provided a maximum range of 16,000 meters (17,000 yd), and they had a maximum ceiling of 10,000 meters (11,000 yd) at 75° elevation. Their effective rate of fire was 6–8 rounds per minute.

 

Akagi's waterline armored belt was reduced from 254 to 152 mm (10 to 6 in) and placed lower on the ship than originally designed. The upper part of her torpedo bulge was given 102 mm (4 in) of armor. Her deck armor was also reduced from 96 to 79 mm (3.8 to 3.1 in). The modifications improved the ship's stability by helping compensate for the increased topside weight of the double hangar deck.

 

In Akagi's predecessor, Hōshō, the hot exhaust gases vented by swivelling funnels posed a danger to the ship, and wind-tunnel testing had not suggested any solutions. Akagi and Kaga were given different solutions to evaluate in real-world conditions. Akagi was given two funnels on the starboard side. The larger, forward funnel was angled 30° below horizontal with its mouth facing the sea, and the smaller one exhausted vertically a little past the edge of the flight deck. The forward funnel was fitted with a water-cooling system to reduce the turbulence caused by hot exhaust gases and a cover that could be raised to allow the exhaust gases to escape if the ship developed a severe list and the mouth of the funnel touched the sea. Kaga adopted a version of this configuration when she was modernized during the mid-1930s.

 

Akagi was completed with four Gihon geared steam turbine sets, each driving one propeller shaft, that produced a total of 131,000 shaft horsepower (98,000 kW). Steam for these turbines was provided by nineteen Type B Kampon boilers with a working pressure of 20 kg/cm2 (1,961 kPa; 284 psi). Some boilers were oil-fired, and the others used a mix of fuel oil and coal. As a battlecruiser, she was expected to achieve 28.5 knots (52.8 km/h; 32.8 mph), but the reduction in displacement from 41,200 to 34,000 long tons (41,900 to 34,500 t) increased her maximum speed to 32.5 knots (60.2 km/h; 37.4 mph), which was reached during her sea trials on 17 June 1927. She carried 3,900 long tons (4,000 t) of fuel oil and 2,100 long tons (2,100 t) of coal that gave her a range of 8,000 nautical miles (15,000 km; 9,200 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph).

 

Akagi joined the Combined Fleet in August 1927 and was assigned to the First Carrier Division upon its formation on 1 April 1928, serving as the division's flagship under Rear Admiral Sankichi Takahashi. The carrier's early career was uneventful, consisting of various training exercises. From 10 December 1928 to 1 November 1929, the ship was captained by Isoroku Yamamoto, future commander of the Combined Fleet.

 

Akagi was reduced to second-class reserve status on 1 December 1931 in preparation for a short refit in which her arresting gear was replaced and her radio and ventilation systems were overhauled and improved. After completion of the refit, Akagi became a first-class reserve ship in December 1932. On 25 April 1933, she resumed active service and joined the Second Carrier Division and participated in that year's Special Fleet Maneuvers.

 

At this time, the IJN's carrier doctrine was still in its early stages. Akagi and the IJN's other carriers were initially given roles as tactical force multipliers supporting the fleet's battleships in the IJN's "decisive battle" doctrine. In this role, Akagi's aircraft were to attack enemy battleships with bombs and torpedoes. Aerial strikes against enemy carriers were later (beginning around 1932–1933) deemed of equal importance, with the goal of establishing air superiority during the initial stages of battle. The essential component in this strategy was that the Japanese carrier aircraft must be able to strike first with a massed, preemptive aerial attack. In fleet training exercises, the carriers began to operate together in front of or with the main battle line. The new strategy emphasized maximum speed from both the carriers and the aircraft they carried as well as larger aircraft with greater range. Thus, longer flight decks on the carriers were required in order to handle the newer, heavier aircraft which were entering service. As a result, on 15 November 1935 Akagi was placed in third-class reserve to begin an extensive modernization at Sasebo Naval Arsenal.

 

Akagi's modernization involved far less work than that of Kaga, but took three times as long due to financial difficulties related to the Great Depression. The ship's three flight decks were judged too small to handle the larger and heavier aircraft then coming into service.As a result, the middle and lower flight decks were eliminated in favor of two enclosed hangar decks that extended almost the full length of the ship. The upper and middle hangar areas' total space increased to about 93,000 square feet (8,600 m2); the lower hangar remained the same size.The upper flight deck was extended to the bow, increasing its length to 249.17 meters (817 ft 6 in) and raising aircraft capacity to 86 (61 operational and 25 in storage). A third elevator midships, 11.8 by 13 meters (38 ft 9 in × 42 ft 8 in) in size, was added. Her arrester gear was replaced by a Japanese-designed, hydraulic Type 1 system with 9 wires.The modernization added an island superstructure on the port side of the ship, which was an unusual arrangement; the only other carrier to share this feature was a contemporary, the Hiryū. The port side was chosen as an experiment to see if that side was better for flight operations by moving the island away from the ship's exhaust outlets. The new flight deck inclined slightly fore and aft from a point about three-eighths of the way aft.

 

Akagi's speed was already satisfactory and the only changes to her machinery were the replacement of the mixed coal/oil-fired boilers with modern oil-fired units and the improvement of the ventilation arrangements. Although the engine horsepower increased from 131,200 to 133,000, her speed declined slightly from 32.5 to 31.2 knots (60.2 to 57.8 km/h; 37.4 to 35.9 mph) on trials because of the increase in her displacement to 41,300 long tons (42,000 t). Her bunkerage was increased to 7,500 long tons (7,600 t) of fuel oil which increased her endurance to 10,000 nautical miles (18,520 km; 11,510 mi) at 16 knots (30 km/h; 18 mph). The rear vertical funnel was changed to match the forward funnel and incorporated into the same casing.[30][32]

 

The two twin turrets on the middle flight deck were removed and fourteen twin 25 mm (1 in) Type 96 gun mounts were added on sponsons.[33] They fired .25-kilogram (0.55 lb) projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s); at 50°, this provided a maximum range of 7,500 m (8,200 yd), and an effective ceiling of 5,500 m (18,000 ft). The maximum effective rate of fire was only between 110–120 rounds per minute due to the frequent need to change the 15-round magazines. Six Type 95 directors were fitted to control the new 25 mm guns and two new Type 94 anti-aircraft directors replaced the outdated Type 91s. After the modernization, Akagi carried one Type 89 director for the 20 cm (7.9 in) guns; it is uncertain how many were carried before then. The ship's crew increased to 2,000 after the reconstruction.

  

Port-side anti-aircraft gun sponsons in Akagi, showing their low-mounted position on the hull, which greatly restricted their arc of fire.

The ship's anti-aircraft guns were grouped amidships and placed relatively low on the hull. Thus, the guns could not be brought to bear directly forward or aft. Also, the island blocked the forward arcs of the port battery. As a result, the ship was vulnerable to attack by dive bombers. The ship's 12 cm 10th Year Type guns were scheduled to be replaced by more modern 12.7 cm (5 in) Type 89 mounts in 1942. The anti-aircraft sponsons were to be raised one deck to allow them some measure of cross-deck fire as was done during Kaga's modernization. However, the ship was lost in combat before the upgrade could take place.

 

Several major weaknesses in Akagi's design were not rectified. Akagi's aviation fuel tanks were incorporated directly into the structure of the carrier, meaning that shocks to the ship, such as those caused by bomb or shell hits, would be transmitted directly to the tanks, resulting in cracks or leaks. Also, the fully enclosed structure of the new hangar decks made firefighting difficult, at least in part because fuel vapors could accumulate in the hangars. Adding to the danger was the requirement of the Japanese carrier doctrine that aircraft be serviced, fueled, and armed whenever possible on the hangar decks rather than on the flight deck. Furthermore, the carrier's hangar and flight decks carried little armor protection, and there was no redundancy in the ship's fire-extinguishing systems. These weaknesses would later be crucial factors in the loss of the ship.

 

Akagi's modernization was completed on 31 August 1938. She was reclassified as a first reserve ship on 15 November, but did not rejoin the First Carrier Division until the following month. In her new configuration, the carrier embarked 12 Mitsubishi A5M Type 96 "Claude" fighters with four disassembled spares, 19 Aichi D1A "Susie" dive bombers with five spares, and 35 Yokosuka B4Y "Jean" horizontal/torpedo bombers with 16 spares. She sailed for southern Chinese waters on 30 January 1939 and supported ground operations there, including attacks on Guilin and Liuzhou, until 19 February, when she returned to Japan. Akagi supported operations in central China between 27 March and 2 April 1940. She was reclassified as a special purpose ship (Tokubetse Ilomokan) on 15 November 1940, while she was being overhauled.

 

The Japanese experiences off China had helped further develop the IJN's carrier doctrine. One lesson learned in China was the importance of concentration and mass in projecting naval air power ashore. Therefore, in April 1941, the IJN formed the First Air Fleet, or Kido Butai, to combine all of its fleet carriers under a single command. On 10 April, Akagi and Kaga were assigned to the First Carrier Division as part of the new carrier fleet, which also included the Second (with carriers Hiryū and Sōryū), and Fifth (with Shōkaku and Zuikaku) carrier divisions. The IJN centered its doctrine on air strikes that combined the air groups of entire carrier divisions, rather than individual carriers. When multiple carrier divisions were operating together, the divisions' air groups were combined. This doctrine of combined, massed, carrier-based air attack groups was the most advanced of its kind in the world. The IJN, however, remained concerned that concentrating all of its carriers together would render them vulnerable to being wiped out all at once by a massive enemy air or surface strike. Thus, the IJN developed a compromise solution in which the fleet carriers would operate closely together within their carrier divisions but the divisions themselves would operate in loose rectangular formations, with approximately 7,000 meters (7,700 yd) separating each carrier.

 

The Japanese doctrine held that entire carrier air groups should not be launched in a single massed attack. Instead, each carrier would launch a "deckload strike" of all its aircraft that could be spotted at one time on each flight deck. Subsequent attack waves consisted of the next deckload of aircraft. Thus, First Air Fleet air attacks would often consist of at least two massed waves of aircraft. The First Air Fleet was not considered to be the IJN's primary strategic striking force. The IJN still considered the First Air Fleet an integral component in the Combined Fleet's Kantai Kessen or "decisive battle" task force centered on battleships.Akagi was designated as the flagship for the First Air Fleet, a role the ship retained until her sinking 14 months later.

 

Although the concentration of so many fleet carriers into a single unit was a new and revolutionary offensive strategic concept, the First Air Fleet suffered from several defensive deficiencies that gave it, in Mark Peattie's words, a "'glass jaw': it could throw a punch but couldn't take one." Japanese carrier anti-aircraft guns and associated fire-control systems had several design and configuration deficiencies that limited their effectiveness. Also, the IJN's fleet combat air patrol (CAP) consisted of too few fighter aircraft and was hampered by an inadequate early warning system, including lack of radar. In addition, poor radio communications with the fighter aircraft inhibited effective command and control of the CAP. Furthermore, the carriers' escorting warships were not trained or deployed to provide close anti-aircraft support. These deficiencies, combined with the shipboard weaknesses previously detailed, would eventually doom Akagi and other First Air Fleet carriers.

 

In the Fall of 1941, with tensions rising with the United States, The Kido Buati Consisting of the First Carrier Division(Dai Ichi Kōkū senta) Akagi Flagship) ,Kaga

Second Carrier Division (Dai Ni Kōkū sentai, Ni Kōsen) Sōryū (Blue Dragon) and

Hiryū (飛龍, "Flying Dragon") Flagship

and the Newly Created Five Carrier Division (Dai-Go Kōkū-Sentai)

Shōkaku ("Soaring Crane") Flagship and

Zuikaku (Auspicious Crane") became Preparations for an Attack on Pearl harbor.

 

The Six carriers trained in the fall with the Air Groups commencing mock Attacks on their own ships along with their escort vessels. Once preparations and training were completed, Akagi assembled with the rest of the First Air Fleet at Hitokappu Bay in the Kuril Islands on 22 November 1941. The ships departed on 26 November 1941 for Hawaii along Battleships Hiei and Kirishima of the 3rd Battleship Division and Ton and Chikuma of the 8th Cruiser Division.

  

A6M2 Zero fighters prepare to launch from Akagi as part of the second wave during the attack on Pearl Harbor

Commanded by Captain Kiichi Hasegawa, Akagi was Vice Admiral Chūichi Nagumo's flagship for the striking force for the attack on Pearl Harbor[that attempted to cripple the United States Pacific Fleet. Akagi and the other five carriers, from a position 230 nautical miles (430 km; 260 mi) north of Oahu, launched two waves of aircraft on the morning of 7 December 1941. In the first wave, 27 Nakajima B5N "Kate" torpedo bombers from Akagi torpedoed the battleships Oklahoma, West Virginia, and California while 9 of the ship's Mitsubishi A6M Zeros attacked the air base at Hickam Field. In the second wave, 18 Aichi D3A "Val" dive bombers from the carrier targeted the battleships Maryland and Pennsylvania, the light cruiser Raleigh, the destroyer Shaw, and the fleet oiler Neosho while nine "Zeros" attacked various American airfields. One of the carrier's Zeros was shot down by American anti-aircraft guns during the first wave attack, killing its pilot, In addition to the aircraft which participated in the raid, three of the carrier's fighters were assigned to the CAP. One of the carrier's Zero fighters attacked a Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress heavy bomber that had just arrived from the mainland, setting it on fire as it landed at Hickam, killing one of its crew.

 

In January 1942, together with the rest of the First and Fifth Carrier Divisions, Akagi supported the invasion of Rabaul in the Bismarck Archipelago, as the Japanese moved to secure their southern defensive perimeter against attacks from Australia. She provided 20 B5Ns and 9 Zeros for the initial airstrike on Rabaul on 20 January 1942. The First Carrier Division attacked Allied positions at nearby Kavieng the following day, of which Akagi contributed 9 A6M Zeros and 18 D3As. On the 22nd, Akagi's D3As and Zeros again attacked Rabaul before returning to Truk on 27 January. The Second Carrier Division, with Sōryū and Hiryū, had been detached to support the invasion of Wake Island on 23 December 1941 and did not reunite with the rest of the carrier mobile striking force until February 1942.

 

Akagi, along with Kaga and the carrier Zuikaku, sortied in search of American naval forces raiding the Marshall Islands on 1 February 1942, before being recalled. On 7 February Akagi and the carriers of the First and Second Carrier Divisions were ordered south to the Timor Sea where, on 19 February, from a point 100 nautical miles (190 km; 120 mi) southeast of the easternmost tip of Timor, they launched air strikes against Darwin, Australia, in an attempt to destroy its port and airfield facilities to prevent any interference with the invasion of Java. Akagi contributed 18 B5Ns, 18 D3As, and 9 Zeros to the attack, which caught the defenders by surprise. Eight ships were sunk, including the American destroyer Peary, and fourteen more were damaged. None of the carrier's aircraft were lost in the attack and the attack was effective in preventing Darwin from contributing to the Allied defense of Java. On 1 March, the American oiler Pecos was sunk by D3As from Sōryū and Akagi. Later that same day the American destroyer Edsall was attacked and sunk by D3As from Akagi and Sōryū, in combination with gunfire from two battleships and two heavy cruisers of the escort force. Akagi and her consorts covered the invasion of Java, although her main contribution appears to have been providing 18 B5Ns and 9 Zeros for the 5 March air strike on Tjilatjap. This group was very successful, sinking eight ships in the harbor there and none of Akagi's aircraft were lost. Most of the Allied forces in the Dutch East Indies surrendered to the Japanese later in March. The Kido Butai then sailed for Staring Bay on Celebes Island to refuel and recuperate.

 

On 26 March, Akagi set sail for the Indian Ocean raid with the rest of the Kido Butai. The Japanese intent was to defeat the British Eastern Fleet and destroy British airpower in the region in order to secure the flank of their operations in Burma. On 5 April 1942, Akagi launched 17 B5Ns and 9 Zeros in an air strike against Colombo, Ceylon, which damaged the port facilities. None of the aircraft were lost and the Zero pilots claimed to have shot down a dozen of the defending British fighters. Later that day, 17 D3As from Akagi helped to sink the British heavy cruisers Cornwall and Dorsetshire. On 9 April, she attacked Trincomalee with 18 B5Ns, escorted by 6 Zeros which claimed to have shot down 5 Hawker Hurricane fighters (only two of which can be confirmed from Allied records) without loss to themselves. Meanwhile, a floatplane from the battleship Haruna spotted the small aircraft carrier Hermes, escorted by the Australian destroyer Vampire, and every available D3A was launched to attack the ships. Akagi contributed 17 dive bombers and they helped to sink both ships; they also spotted the oil tanker RFA Athelstone, escorted by the corvette Hollyhock, as well and sank both without loss. During the day's actions, the carrier narrowly escaped damage when nine British Bristol Blenheim bombers from Ceylon penetrated the CAP and dropped their bombs from 11,000 feet (3,400 m), just missing the carrier and the heavy cruiser Tone. Four of the Blenheims were subsequently shot down by CAP fighters and one was shot down by aircraft from the carriers' returning air strike.After the raid, the carrier mobile striking force returned to Japan to refit and replenish.

 

On 19 April 1942, while near Taiwan during the transit to Japan, Akagi, Sōryū, and Hiryū were sent in pursuit of the American carriers Hornet and Enterprise, which had launched the Doolittle Raid. They found only empty ocean, however, for the American carriers had immediately departed the area to return to Hawaii. Akagi and the other carriers shortly abandoned the chase and dropped anchor at Hashirajima anchorage on 22 April. On 25 April, Captain Taijiro Aoki relieved Hasegawa as skipper of the carrier. Having been engaged in constant operations for four and a half months, the ship, along with the other three carriers of the First and Second Carrier Divisions, was hurriedly refitted and replenished in preparation for the Combined Fleet's next major operation, scheduled to begin one month hence. The Fifth Carrier Division, with Shōkaku and Zuikaku, had been detached in mid-April to support Operation Mo, resulting in the Battle of the Coral Sea. While at Hashirajima, Akagi's air group was based ashore in Kagoshima and conducted flight and weapons training with the other First Air Fleet carrier units.

 

Concerned by the US carrier strikes in the Marshall Islands, Lae-Salamaua, and the Doolittle raids, Yamamoto determined to force the US Navy into a showdown to eliminate the American carrier threat. He decided to invade and occupy Midway Island, which he was sure would draw out the American carrier forces to battle. The Japanese codenamed the Midway invasion Operation MI.

 

On 25 May 1942, Akagi set out with the Combined Fleet's carrier striking force in the company of carriers Kaga, Hiryū, and Sōryū, which constituted the First and Second Carrier Divisions, for the attack on Midway Island. Once again, Nagumo flew his flag on Akagi. Because of damage and losses suffered during the Battle of the Coral Sea, the Fifth Carrier Division with carriers Shōkaku and Zuikaku was absent from the operation. Akagi's aircraft complement consisted of 24 Zeros, 18 D3As, and 18 B5Ns.

 

With the fleet positioned 250 nautical miles (460 km; 290 mi) northwest of Midway Island at dawn (04:45 local time) on 4 June 1942, Akagi's portion of the 108-plane combined air raid was a strike on the airfield on Eastern Island with 18 dive bombers escorted by nine Zeros. The carrier's B5Ns were armed with torpedoes and kept ready in case enemy ships were discovered during the Midway operation. The only loss during the raid from Akagi's air group was one Zero shot down by AA fire and three damaged; four dive bombers were damaged, one of which could not be repaired.

 

Unbeknownst to the Japanese, the US Navy had discovered the Japanese MI plan by breaking the Japanese cipher and had prepared an ambush using its three available carriers, positioned northeast of Midway

  

One of Akagi's torpedo bombers was launched to augment the search for any American ships that might be in the area.The carrier contributed three Zeros to the total of 11 assigned to the initial combat air patrol over the four carriers. By 07:00, the carrier had 11 fighters with the CAP which helped to defend the Kido Butai from the first US attackers from Midway Island at 07:10.

 

At this time, Nagumo's carriers were attacked by six US Navy Grumman TBF Avengers from Torpedo Squadron 8 (VT-8) and four United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) B-26 Marauders, all carrying torpedoes. The Avengers went after Hiryū while the Marauders attacked Akagi. The 30 CAP Zeroes in the air at this time, including the 11 from Akagi, immediately attacked the American aircraft, shooting down five of the Avengers and two of the B-26s. One of Akagi's Zeroes, however, was shot down by defensive fire from the B-26s. Several of the Marauders dropped their torpedoes, but all either missed or failed to detonate. One B-26, piloted by Lieutenant James Muri, strafed Akagi after dropping its torpedo, killing two men. Another, after being seriously damaged by anti-aircraft fire, didn’t pull out of its run, and instead headed directly for Akagi's bridge. The aircraft, either attempting a suicide ramming, or out of control due to battle damage or a wounded or killed pilot, narrowly missed crashing into the carrier's bridge, which could have killed Nagumo and his command staff, before it cartwheeled into the sea. This experience may well have contributed to Nagumo's determination to launch another attack on Midway, in direct violation of Yamamoto's order to keep the reserve strike force armed for anti-ship operations.

 

At 07:15, Nagumo ordered the B5Ns on Kaga and Akagi rearmed with bombs for another attack on Midway itself. This process was limited by the number of ordnance carts (used to handle the bombs and torpedoes) and ordnance elevators, preventing torpedoes from being struck below until after all the bombs were moved up from their magazine, assembled, and mounted on the aircraft. This process normally took about an hour and a half; more time would be required to bring the aircraft up to the flight deck, warm up and launch the strike group. Around 07:40, Nagumo reversed his order when he received a message from one of his scout aircraft that American warships had been spotted. Three of Akagi's CAP Zeroes landed aboard the carrier at 07:36. At 07:40, her lone scout returned, having sighted nothing.

  

At 07:55, the next American strike from Midway arrived in the form of 16 Marine SBD-2 Dauntless dive bombers of VMSB-241 under Major Lofton R. Henderson.[Note 5] Akagi's three remaining CAP fighters were among the nine still aloft that attacked Henderson's planes, shooting down six of them as they executed a fruitless glide bombing attack on Hiryū. At roughly the same time, the Japanese carriers were attacked by 12 USAAF B-17 Flying Fortresses, bombing from 20,000 feet (6,100 m). The high altitude of the bombers gave the Japanese captains enough time to anticipate where the bombs would land and successfully maneuver their ships out of the impact area. Four B-17s attacked Akagi, but missed with all their bombs.[75]

 

Akagi reinforced the CAP with launches of three Zeros at 08:08 and four at 08:32.[These fresh Zeros helped defeat the next American air strike from Midway, 11 Vought SB2U Vindicators from VMSB-241, which attacked the battleship Haruna starting around 08:30. Three of the Vindicators were shot down, and Haruna escaped damage.Although all the American air strikes had thus far caused negligible damage, they kept the Japanese carrier forces off-balance as Nagumo endeavored to prepare a response to news, received at 08:20, of the sighting of American carrier forces to his northeast.

 

Akagi began recovering her Midway strike force at 08:37 and finished shortly after 09:00.The landed aircraft were quickly struck below, while the carriers' crews began preparations to spot aircraft for the strike against the American carrier forces. The preparations, however, were interrupted at 09:18 when the first American carrier aircraft to attack were sighted. These consisted of 15 Douglas TBD Devastator torpedo bombers of VT-8, led by John C. Waldron from the carrier Hornet. The six airborne Akagi CAP Zeroes joined the other 15 CAP fighters currently aloft in destroying Waldron's planes. All 15 of the American planes were shot down as they attempted a torpedo attack on Soryū, leaving one surviving aviator treading water.

 

Shortly afterwards 14 Devastators from VT-6 from the carrier Enterprise, led by Eugene E. Lindsey, attacked. Lindsey's aircraft tried to sandwich Kaga, but the CAP, reinforced by an additional eight Zeros launched by Akagi at 09:33 and 09:40, shot down all but four of the Devastators, and Kaga dodged the torpedoes. Defensive fire from the Devastators shot down one of Akagi's Zeros.[

 

Minutes after the torpedo plane attacks, American carrier-based dive bombers arrived over the Japanese carriers almost undetected and began their dives. It was at this time, around 10:20, that in the words of Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully, the "Japanese air defenses would finally and catastrophically fail.Twenty-eight dive bombers from Enterprise, led by C. Wade McClusky, began an attack on Kaga, hitting her with at least four bombs. At the last minute, one of McClusky's elements of three bombers from VB-6, led by squadron commander Richard Best who deduced Kaga to be fatally damaged, broke off and dove simultaneously on Akagi. At approximately 10:26, the three bombers hit her with one 1,000-pound (450 kg) bomb and just missed with two others. The first near-miss landed 5–10 m (16–33 ft) to port, near her island. The third bomb just missed the flight deck and plunged into the water next to the stern. The second bomb, likely dropped by Best, landed at the aft edge of the middle elevator and detonated in the upper hangar. This hit set off explosions among the fully armed and fueled B5N torpedo bombers that were being prepared for an air strike against the American carriers, resulting in an uncontrollable fire.

 

At 10:29, Aoki ordered the ship's magazines flooded. The forward magazines were promptly flooded, but the aft magazines were not due to valve damage, likely caused by the near miss aft. The ship's main water pump also appears to have been damaged, greatly hindering fire fighting efforts. On the upper hangar deck, at 10:32 damage control teams attempted to control the spreading fires by employing the one-shot CO2 fire-suppression system. Whether the system functioned or not is unclear, but the burning aviation fuel proved impossible to control, and serious fires began to advance deeper into the interior of the ship. At 10:40, additional damage caused by the near-miss aft made itself known when the ship's rudder jammed 30 degrees to starboard during an evasive maneuver.

 

Shortly thereafter, the fires broke through the flight deck and heat and smoke made the ship's bridge unusable. At 10:46, Nagumo transferred his flag to the light cruiser Nagara.Akagi stopped dead in the water at 13:50 and her crew, except for Aoki and damage-control personnel, was evacuated. She continued to burn as her crew fought a losing battle against the spreading fires. The damage-control teams and Aoki were evacuated from the still floating ship later that night.

 

At 04:50 on 5 June, Yamamoto ordered Akagi scuttled, saying to his staff, "I was once the captain of Akagi, and it is with heartfelt regret that I must now order that she be sunk. Destroyers Arashi, Hagikaze, Maikaze, and Nowaki each fired one torpedo into the carrier and she sank, bow first, at 05:20 at 30°30′N 178°40′WCoordinates: 30°30′N 178°40′W. Two hundred and sixty-seven men of the ship's crew were lost, the fewest of any of the Japanese fleet carriers lost in the battle. The loss of Akagi and the three other IJN carriers at Midway, comprising two thirds of Japan's total number of fleet carriers and the experienced core of the First Air Fleet, was a crucial strategic defeat for Japan and contributed significantly to Japan's ultimate defeat in the war.In an effort to conceal the defeat, Akagi was not immediately removed from the Navy's registry of ships, instead being listed as "unmanned" before finally being struck from the registry on 25 September 1942

 

Akagi's Wreck and Her sister's Kaga were discovered on October-29th and October-26th-2019 Respectively 77 years after the Battle.

 

Kaga(Increased Joy) was an Akagi Class Aircraft Carrier of the Imperial Japanese Navy.

Like her sister Akagi, was a Conversion ,this time though, as a Battleship

Her Keel was laid down on July 19th-1920 at Kawasaki Heavy Industries in Kobe Japan as the Second of the Tosa Class Battleships. She was launched on November 17th-1921. Work was suspended on both Ships with Japan's Signing of the Washington Naval Treaty on February-6th-1922. This Treaty was signed by the Empire of Japan, the United Kingdom, The United States,the Kingdom of Italy and the French Third Republic. The treaty limited the construction of Battleships and Battlecruisers but allowed conversion of two battleship or battlecruiser hulls under construction into aircraft carriers of up to 33,000 long tons (34,000 t) displacement.Akagi and her Sister Amagi were the intended Conversions

and Tosa and Kaga to Be Scrapped.

However, Amagi was severely damaged beyond economic Repair in the Great Kantō earthquake on September-1st-1923. Kaga was then chosen to be Amagi's Replacement.

 

She was officially commissioned on 31 March 1928, but this signified only the beginning of sea trials. She joined the Combined Fleet (Rengō Kantai) on 30 November 1929 as the IJN's third carrier to enter service, after Hōshō (1922) and Akagi (1927) under First Carrier Fleet 第一航空戦隊, Dai Ichi Kōkū sentai, often abbreviated as 一航戦 Ichikō-sen)

 

Kaga was completed with a length of 238.5 meters (782 ft 6 in) overall. She had a beam of 31.67 meters (103 ft 11 in) and a draft at full load of 7.92 meters (26 ft). She displaced 26,900 long tons (27,300 t) at standard load, and 33,693 long tons (34,234 t) at full load, nearly 6,000 long tons (6,100 t) less than her designed displacement as a battleship.Her complement totaled 1,340 crewmembers.

 

Kaga, like Akagi, was completed with three superimposed flight decks, the only carriers ever to be designed so. The British carriers converted from "large light cruisers", Glorious, Courageous, and Furious, each had two flight decks, but there is no evidence that the Japanese copied the British model. It is more likely that it was a case of convergent evolution to improve launch and recovery cycle flexibility by allowing simultaneous launch and recovery of aircraft. Kaga's main flight deck was 171.2 meters (561 ft 8 in) long and 30.5 meters (100 ft) wide,her middle flight deck was only about 15 meters (49 ft 3 in) long and started in front of the bridge, and her lower flight deck was approximately 55 meters (180 ft 5 in) long. The utility of her middle flight deck was questionable as it was so short that only some of the lightly loaded aircraft could use it, even in

“Hitch-22: A Memoir” ―Christopher Hitchens, 2010

 

“About once or twice every month I engage in public debates with those whose pressing need it is to woo and to win the approval of supernatural beings. Very often, when I give my view that there is no supernatural dimension, and certainly not one that is only or especially available to the faithful, and that the natural world is wonderful enough—and even miraculous enough if you insist—I attract pitying looks and anxious questions. How, in that case, I am asked, do I find meaning and purpose in life? How does a mere and gross materialist, with no expectation of a life to come, decide what, if anything, is worth caring about?

 

Depending on my mood, I sometimes but not always refrain from pointing out what a breathtakingly insulting and patronizing question this is. (It is on a par with the equally subtle inquiry: Since you don't believe in our god, what stops you from stealing and lying and raping and killing to your heart's content?) Just as the answer to the latter question is: self-respect and the desire for the respect of others—while in the meantime it is precisely those who think they have divine permission who are truly capable of any atrocity—so the answer to the first question falls into two parts. A life that partakes even a little of friendship, love, irony, humor, parenthood, literature, and music, and the chance to take part in battles for the liberation of others cannot be called 'meaningless' except if the person living it is also an existentialist and elects to call it so. It could be that all existence is a pointless joke, but it is not in fact possible to live one's everyday life as if this were so. Whereas if one sought to define meaninglessness and futility, the idea that a human life should be expended in the guilty, fearful, self-obsessed propitiation of supernatural nonentities… but there, there. Enough.”

The Arcanatrik Industries Storm submachine gun is the product of a program under the same name. The objective of the program was to create a weapon that was capable of producing a volume of fire equal to of a few standard infantryman. The weapon is designed primarily for use by vehicle crews and pilots. It fires a caseless version of FN Herstal's 5.7x28mm armor-piercing round.

    

Like all A.I. weapons, the Storm is constructed entirely out of polymer, carbon fiber, and high grade aluminum and steel. It comes standard with 100-round helical magazines and Magpul MBUS iron sights. It also is equipped with a A.I. flash hider and a modified version of the recoil-reducing mechanism seen on the Longbow DMR- www.flickr.com/photos/30601362@N04/7413558050/in/photostream.

    

Due to what this weapon was designed for, it has only one fire mode–fully automatic. It is also not recommended that this weapon be fired at ranges over 170 meters, as aimed fire at that range is largely impractical, and aimed fire at that range is only viable while manually bursting the weapon. And it should also be noted that this weapon should be used like a PDW. That is, it is a last resort weapon, as it is unlikely one will be carrying more than a few magazines, and the fire rate of the Storm will deplete the magazines in just under 4 and-a-half seconds. A good thing to remember–when in doubt, spray 'n pray is a viable tactic.

        

Specifications:

Cartridge: FN 5.7x28mm (caseless)

Weight: 6.2 lb (2.8 kg)

Length: 31 in (787.4 mm)

Barrel Length: 9 in (228.6 mm)

Action: Gas-operated, rotating bolt

Rate of Fire: 1350 rounds/min

Muzzle Velocity: 720 m/s (2,362 ft/s)

Effective Range: 170 m (186 yd)

Maximum Range: 1400 m (1,531 yd)

Feed System: 100-round detachable helical magazine

    

Another fun build! Really all I have done today is work on this weapon. Sometime soon I will release a Arcanatrik Industries "stuff" pack. So watch for that!

    

Credit:

-Amy/Woitek for the slightly modified charging handle

-Русский Сурт's Matrix font

troybooks.co.uk/a-witch's-natural-history.html

 

CHAPTER 4:

THE CURSE OF THE ORACLE: CORVIDS IN MYTH AND LORE

 

There is a wood of ambivalent memory in Buckinghamshire, on the periphery of Burnham Beeches, used for duck and pheasant shooting. On weekends, the air erupts with hollow thuds of shotguns. Cartridges litter the woodland floor, some half buried amongst the beech nuts and turquoise cushions of Leucobryum moss. I used to go there to collect skulls, and their eye sockets would stare at visitors from the window-sill at home: a fox, several ducks, muntjacs, a squirrel, rabbits, a stoat with the brain cavity cleaved asunder, but most of all, the globed and perfect skulls of crows. Crows are intelligent, capable of tool-use and lateral thinking; pheasants are not. The gamekeeper waged war on them, incensed by the increasing inventiveness of their strategies for stealing chicks and eggs. One day, trespassing deeper into the woods, I found a dead crow slung from a barbed-wire fence, strung up like a lightning zigzag, zeroing to ground. The wings and limbs were contorted; the beak pincered the wire. Mummified in its agony, the bird had been strung up alive. Anger clouded my eyes. I cut down the corpse, dry, crisp, feather-light but still noisome, wrapped it in dark cloth and buried it in the garden, letting its blackness seep back into the earth. Later, I stood over the grave, and imagination, or an apparition, made the earth heave. An explosion of soil, and the crow burst upward in my mind’s eye, over outhouses and fields, back to the wood. The gamekeeper had his own macabre sympathetic magic; I had mine.

 

Perhaps my love for corvids is as irrational as the gamekeeper’s hatred. As a teenager, I raised baby crows, fixed the broken wings of older birds, and came at times to prefer them to human beings. I am in good company. Jackdaws, crows and magpies all have reputations as loquacious pets. A very old broken-winged currawong, a black and white Australian corvid with piercing yellow eyes, used to wander around my favourite reptile park when I was a child, drawling “G’day mate” to all the tourists. Tame corvids learn quickly how to rule the roost, lording it over children, parents and pet dogs alike. They delight in stealing things and hiding them inventively, a vice which their owners are so beguiled as to consistently forgive. They imitate everything, and we echo and invoke them whenever we use their names. John Clare and Charles Dickens had pet ravens. Odin himself had two, Hugin and Munin (Thought and Memory), who flew out across the world bringing him news. The Saga of Flokki insists that the first mariner to discover Iceland did so by releasing his pet raven at sea and following it. A hooded crow belonging to a friend of Konrad Lorenz was trapped by a gamekeeper, escaping at the cost of one of its toes; the crow repeated the gamekeeper’s words on its return. William of Malmesbury tells the story of a witch of Berkeley, in Gloucestershire, whose talking jackdaw foretold her death. Corvids are too like us, which is perhaps why they are scapegoated and hated by those who know them little enough.

 

There are cultures in which corvids are revered. For the Koryac, and other tribes from within the Arctic Circle, Big Raven is at once the world’s creator and denizen. It is often remarked that the mischievousness of corvids is derived from boredom, like an intelligent child deprived of toys; Big Raven and his wife cure their ennui by becoming demiurges. The mountains are his excrement, and Raven himself is both celestial and earthy. His human weird is cantankerous, swallowing the sun in anger when his love-designs are thwarted, and puking it out again when he is tickled by his beloved. During a deluge, he resumes the form of a raven in order to fly to the heavens, so that he can plug up the vulva of the universe’s wife, which is shedding unremitting rain. This Siberian mythos has its counterparts across the Bering Strait, for the Raven is also regarded as a creator amongst the Inuit and the Haida tribe of the Queen Charlotte Islands.

 

Pre-Christian myths about corvids are characterised not by hatred, but by awe. Crows have always had the dubious honour of carrying the curse of the oracle, baring uncomfortable truths to those with too much power. In Greek mythology, the crow, originally white and personified as Cronus, was an oracular bird, and was said to house the soul of a sacred king after his sacrifice. The crow was cursed, blackened and banished by Athene after he reported to her that Herse, Pandrosos and Agraulos had plunged to their deaths from the Acropolis. Variants of this story, reinterpreted by Ovid, remain sympathetic towards the crow or raven, who is turned black for telling Apollo quite truthfully that his lover was unfaithful, and given a croaky voice for being tardy in fetching a cupful of water after being distracted by a meal of figs. A Christianised variant from the Tyrol has the child Jesus blackening the raven for soiling water he was about to drink. Perhaps this in turn was part of the genesis of allegations about Jews and witches poisoning wells.

 

An ancient Breton poem links corvids directly with deities. The mother of Bran, finding him dead, revived him in the form of a crow, and turned herself into a raven, so that they could spend eternity together in an old oak tree overlooking the sea. Irish and Welsh mythology emphasised the fearsome qualities of the birds, but also honoured them with divinity and superhuman powers. Badhbh, the Celtic goddess of war, united the three deities Macha, Neman and Morrigu, and manifested in a corvid form variously interpreted as a raven or a hooded crow. Her status as a deity of war is parallelled by the ancient Persian god, Verethragna, who also manifested as a raven, and who perhaps was reinterpreted as the raven attendant of Mithras. Badhbh plays a typical role in the narrative of the second battle of Moytura, in which, “after the battle was won and the corpses cleared away, the Morrigu… proceeded to proclaim that battle and the mighty victory… to the royal heights of Ireland and to its fairy hosts and its chief waters and its river-mouths” before prophesying the end of the world. A similar corvid war deity surmounts a Celtic war helmet of the second or third century BCE, found in Ciumeşti, Romania: a raven with hinged and flapping wings.

 

Cú Chulainn, too, tangled with the Morrigán in the Ulster Cycle. Woken by a shriek that could clot blood or curdle milk, the hero rushed out into the night, and was confronted by a surreal vision of a horse and chariot. The horse, blood-red in blenching moonshine, tramped on a single leg, the chariot pole pegged to his bleeding head, and rammed through his body. Beside the horse stood a woman, her eyebrows gore-tinged, her cloak dipped in dregs of battle. Beside them, a man drove a cow by hazel-fork, with tonking bell, inanely grinning. “I am Cú Chulainn, cattle-master,” roared the warrior, “And you, a cow-stealer. Submit, or feel my sword.” She of the reddened brow strode up to him, and riled him with riddles, till he clutched the chariot wheel and wept with rage. Her screech made mud clots in the puddles where they stood. Cú Chulainn realised that he had come out of the house bollock-naked. His wife was standing beside him, clutching his britches, sword and axe, and a chainmail suit. He turned away in embarrassment, but the chariot was gone, and on his shoulder, a croaking crow.

 

The supernatural awe inspired by ravens is at its most gripping in ‘The Dream of Rhonabwy’ from the Mabinogion, which tells the story of a surreal battle between the forces of Arthur and Owain’s ravens. Arthur and Owain play Gwyddbwyll, with golden pieces on a silver board, the pieces reflecting their fractured faces, whilst the slaughter continues in the valley below. Distorted raven-shadows wheel across them like windblown ash. A king’s finger makes a move, its whorled print spreading and fading on yellow metal. There are cries of men and raven-cronks, flurries of black talons and wings, and the impassive faces of two kings. Skulls crash to ground, backbones fracture, spleens rupture, gashes bleed. The ravens have carried Arthur’s men into the sky and dropped them from a great height, smashing their bodies against the ground. A raven yawns; a bridge of blood spans his bristled gape. The king withdraws his hand, “Your move.” In all of these examples, one gets the impression that corvids were not to be shot and strung from wires, but to be propitiated and feared. Another tale from the Mabinogion, ‘Peredur, Son of Evrawc’ presents the raven’s taste for carrion in a romantic light. Meeting a raven eating the corpse of a duck in the snow, Peredur sees only his beloved: the snow is the whiteness of her skin, the raven the blackness of her hair, and the drops of blood the colour of her cheeks.

 

Nor was the demonisation of corvids quite complete in the middle ages. A thirteenth century bestiary insists that “the raven signifies the blackness of sinners”, but rather than dwelling upon this notion, proceeds to contrast the raven’s supposed neglect of its nestlings with the assiduousness of the crow: “Men should teach themselves to love their children from the crow’s example.” However, the bestiaries were quick to deride the classical reverence for corvids: “[The Greeks] say that the crow can reveal the purpose of men’s actions: it can disclose the whereabouts of an ambush, and predict the future. This is a great offence, to believe that God entrusts His counsels to crows.” Christian hegemony ensured that corvids, once the oracular birds of classical and Celtic paganism, were now suitable only as auguries for the heterodox. For Shakespeare, a fearful faith in the prophetic utterances of corvids could only be suitably expressed by a villain:

 

Stones have been known to move and trees to speak;

Augures and understood relations have

By maggot-pies and choughs and rooks brought forth

The secret’st man of blood. (Macbeth, Act 3, Scene 5)

 

Macbeth feared that corvids would denounce him as a murderer, as in the case of the child-murderer Thomas Elks in Knockin, Shropshire, in 1590, but it was now left to witches to consort with them directly, or even to become them. Isobel Gowdie’s confession (1662) included crows amongst the favourite forms taken by witches for the flight to the Sabbat. Possession of familiar crows was a sure sign of an old woman’s isolation, a folk belief summed up neatly by Seldiy Bate’s lyric:

 

There is a woman by the hill, if she’s not dead she lives there still.

The henbane all around her grows, her only friends are big black crows.

 

Most damning for corvid reputations was the advent of the Black Death, which swept Europe in the mid-fourteenth century, killing between a third and a half of the population of England. Whole villages were wiped out, and survivors were often too few, or too terrified of contagion, to bury the dead. This unprecedented human tragedy can only have been a boon for carrion birds, whose taste for human flesh had previously only been indulged on battlefields and hangmen’s gibbets. The sight of great flocks of black birds descending on the waste land, and picking the eyes from the skulls of one’s neighbours or relatives can have done little for the estimation of corvids in the minds of survivors. It is not surprising that by the time Pieter Breugel the Elder painted The Triumph of Death (1562), a crow is depicted as Death’s pillion passenger, looking down on dying bodies as they are crushed beneath a cart full of skulls. The Child Ballad from the Scottish borders, ‘Twa Corbies’, and the more courtly English ‘The Three Ravens’ both dwell on corvids’ appetites for the flesh of a dead knight “slain under his shield”, but the corbies’ agreement on how to divide the spoil may well represent a comparatively young folk memory of genuine experiences in the horrendous British winter of 1348-1349:

 

Ye’ll sit on his white hause-bane,

And I’ll pike out his bonny blue e’en:

Wi’ ae lock o’ his gowden hair

We’ll theek our nest when it grows bare.

 

This ballad seems to have influenced a late nineteenth century Devonshire tale in which a young woman of Brennan went to the fair, leaving her baby asleep in her garden. She saw three ravens flying from Blackingstone Rock, and asked, ‘Where be you going to, ravens cruel?” “Up to Brennan!” they responded, and when she returned, her baby was gone. Its bones were later found beneath the ravens’ nest on Blackingstone Rock. By the nineteenth century, it seems, the demonisation of ravens was complete. The Romans had interpreted its call as “cras”, Latin for tomorrow, an expression of hope. Poe’s raven only says “Nevermore”, a prophecy of doom.

 

Choughs have fared rather better in public esteem, although their popularity is perhaps in inverse proportion to their abundance. Shakespeare has hypothetical choughs picking rock samphire from the cliffs of Dover at the scene of Gloucester’s attempted suicide (King Lear, Act 4, Scene 6), although they have not been there for centuries. The bird is proudly vaunted as the Cornish Jack, but was extinct there until only recently. It was associated with Thomas á Becket, but there are no choughs in Canterbury. It has long been vaunted as the incarnation of King Arthur, a tradition perpetuated recently not so much by the British, as by the South African poet John Trotman, whose sonnets equate the chough with Nelson Mandela. Ravens share a similar honour; the ghost of King Arthur supposedly returns annually to Badbury Rings in Dorset to relive his triumph at the battle of Badon.

 

Rooks too, when they are distinguished from crows at all, tend to have a more positive image; it is said, for example, that Pengersick Castle in Cornwall will fall if ever its rooks decide to leave the grounds. Their prescience is the theme of oft-reported tales of their dismantling their own nests hours before a limb drops or a tree falls – a useful skill given their fondness for nesting in elms, which tend to shed branches easily. They are still used as weather auguries in county Durham, where it is thought that if rooks feed in a village, a storm is on its way. More sinister, because it seems to akin to human behaviour, is the “parliament of rooks”, a folklorically-charged phenomenon based on natural observation. Rooks may at times be seen standing in a circle in a field, as if conversing. According to some reports, two or three rooks stand in the middle of the circle, and at the end of the proceedings, either fly away looking relieved, or are set upon by the others and torn to shreds, as if they have been subjected to a trial by jury.

 

Jackdaws are so named because of their call, because they are smaller than other corvids, and because they are certainly the Jacks in any pack of birds; cunning, pilfering rogues. They are notorious for blocking chimneys with sticks. Accustomed as they are to nesting in hollow trees, their strategy is to drop sticks down any promising-looking hollow, until enough snag against the sides for the nest to hold. It is easy for them to provoke superstition: with daws and tchacks, the black beak clacks, tonails tapping on the chimney pot, and with his white eye in his cocked skull the little Jack blinks and bows, dropping sticks and chinking pennies into the soot. His wife lays eggs and begins to sit, but the whole lot comes clattering down the chimney, the eggs smashed, the nest collapsed, and the disgruntled jackdaw sitting in the hearth. In the north of England, such an ungainly entrance is a presage of death, the direst of omens.

 

Jays, with their conspicuous habit of eating and planting acorns, their near-vegetarianism besmirched only by the occasional nest-robbing escapade, and their electric-blue wing coverts, have obvious charisma. They are, however, garrulous in the extreme, and in Somerset, have earned the name Devil Scritch, along with the Gaelic Screachag choille and the Welsh Ysgrech y Coed, woodland screamers. The reference to the Devil may be more than a simple comment on the terrible racket made by a jay in the stillness of the woods. A folk tradition in the southern states of the U.S.A. insists that jays are never seen on Fridays, when they are busy taking sticks to the Devil. Perhaps jays too are still recognisably witches’ birds, lending their wing coverts as charms.

 

The decline of gamekeeping, which has to a certain extent led to the rehabilitation of corvid reputations, has not helped the popular cause of the highly successful English magpie. It has mastered the sins of all its relatives: carrion eater, pilferer and nest-robber. Like all pied things, it has a jester’s notoriety: it looks like a fool, yet is too wise for its own good. It is superfluous to quote the plethora of rhymes which find omens in the number of magpies that cross one’s path; they are at once too ubiquitous and too variable. More interesting is the other feature of the magpie-meeting ritual: the respectful tipping of the hat, tugging of the collar or pulling of the forelock, the addressing of the magpie as “Sir” or “Mister”, and the enquiry after the health of his wife. Here is a living tradition, still practised across Britain, in which an act of propitiation, often openly admitted to be superstitious, is in fact made with a certain degree of awe and trepidation. We have evidence, too, of other magpie-traditions which were still very much alive in the nineteenth century. A dream-book, written in around 1880 by “Zadkiel”, explains that: “To dream that you see a magpie, foretells that you will soon be married, but that you will lose your partner in a few years after your union. To dream you see two magpies, it denotes that you will be married twice, and be twice widowed. And if a man dreams that he sees three magpies, it portends the death of his wife in childbed, and also the death of the child.”

 

Sibly, whose notes on fortune-telling were printed in the same book, had some sage advice for young ladies confounded by the receipt of anonymous valentines. To reveal the author, you must “prick the fourth finger of your left hand, and with a crow-quill write on the back of the valentine the day, hour and year of your birth…Try this on the first Friday after you receive the valentine, but do not go to bed till midnight; place the paper in your left shoe, and put it under your pillow, lay on your left side…” My imagination is at it again: she sits, slightly dizzy from a too-tight corset, dizzier still from the heady thought of a gentleman’s infatuation, blushing, perhaps, at the thought of it – and then works witchcraft so potent that one wonders whether she is all that different from the modern teen-witch who drinks diet coke and invokes Black Shuck: the pricked finger, the left hand, the writing in blood. And she uses a magical item which is as common as dirt, yet more powerful than any number of crystal-tipped wands: the feather of a crow. When she dreams, I wonder will she, as she wishes, see the face of her lover? Or will she see the spirit of Badhbh, taking flight towards the “rooky wood”, before her eyes are blinded by upturned soil?

 

The B-52 is considered the longest lived front-line military aircraft in aviation history. In 1948, Boeing began designing a long range nuclear capable bomber to meet the demands of the Strategic Air Command and the first B-52 was delivered in August 1954. The plane utilized four double engine pods and four twin wheel landing trucks which could be slewed to crab the aircraft in a crosswind landing. The B-52H aircraft used by the Air Force today are older than the pilots who fly them. The engines have no thrust reversers, so a very long reinforced runway is needed for takeoff and landing as the maximum aircraft weight can exceed 200 tons! Internal fuel tanks could hold over 46,000 gallons of fuel, allowing the aircraft to reach targets half-way around the world. With air-to-air refueling, B52's were a truly global aircraft and have flown the 12,000 mile round the world route several times. B-52 bombers were considered the weapon the enemy feared most in the Vietnam War. B-52D's would fly in formation too high to be seen or heard, dropping over one hundred 500 lb bombs each. B-52 tail gunners shot down two enemy aircraft in Viet Nam. All flight controls are manual, making it a very tough aircraft to fly. The BUFF's (Big Ugly Fat Fellows) have survived wars, modernization, and replacement from more than five next generation bombers, but have remained in active Air Force inventory for almost forty years. B-52's are used today as cruise missile carriers, but during the Gulf War reverted to their original design of carrying a large number of iron bombs, earning the respect and fear of those on the receiving end.

 

Operation LINEBACKER II

 

According to sources from Maxwell AFB (they can infer, but not document), this B-52D participated in Operation LINEBACKER II ("The Christmas bombing offensive") while being assigned to the 43rd Strategic Wing, Anderson AFB, Guam, after October 1973. In the space of 11 days, B-52 Stratofortresses flew 729 sorties against 34 targets in North Vietnam above the 20th parallel. They expanded over 15,000 tons of ordnance in the process. A single B-52D Stratofortress Bomber carrying a full load of 80,000 pounds of conventional weapons can make a destruction zone roughly 3,000 yards long and about 1,000 yards wide. Bomb damage assessment revealed 1600 military structures either damaged or destroyed, 500 rail interdictions, 372 pieces of rolling stock damaged or destroyed, three million gallons of petroleum products destroyed (this is estimated to be one-fourth of North Vietnam's reserves), ten interdictions of airfield runways and ramps. In an attempt to defend themselves against this mass destruction from these heavy bombers the North Vietnamese used AAA, (Anti Aircraft Artillery) Migs, (Russian made fighter jets), SAMs (Surface to Air Missiles). Actual estimate of the amount of AAA that was fired is unavailable, but the general persistence and intensity throughout the campaign was an enormous outlay of ammunition. The amount of cannon and rocket ordnance used by the North Vietnamese Mig Fighters against the large bomber force is unavailable. The best estimate of missiles fired at B-52s by SAM sites is about 884 (one source suggests as many as 1,242 SAMs fired). Of the roughly 884 SAMs fired, only 24 achieved hits, for a 2.7 percent success rate of launches to hits. Of the 24, only 15 resulted in a downed aircraft, one aircraft (a B-52D) was on a bombing run during LINEBACKER II with its bomb bay doors wide open ready to drop its load when a SAM made a direct hit up in the bomb bay itself, thus completely destroying the aircraft. Another bird came back and was only a breath away from making a safe landing. This represents 3.4 percent of the sorties hit, and 2.06 percent lost. There were 92 crewmembers aboard the 15 aircraft that went down over North Vietnam

 

To date, there were only 5 tail gunners that engaged in air-to-air combat with North Vietnamese Mig Fighters; two were confirmed and the other three were un-confirmed. The tail gunners of B-52D s/n 55-679 were not among these aerial engagements. The B-52D bomber has a tail-mounted MD-9 Fire Control System, four 50. cal machine guns, each with 600 rounds per gun. Boeing built a total of 170 B-52D models: 69 of them came from the Wichita plant and 101 came from the Seattle plant.

 

The museum's B-52D, serial number 55-679, was manufactured by Boeing Aircraft, Wichita, KS, and delivered to the Air Force on June 5, 1957. During the Vietnam Conflict, it served 41 months (November 1966 to October 1973) in combat with 175 missions. In 1975, it was involved in a ground mishap at March AFB that resulted in a broken wing spar. Our B-52D last saw service here at the March Air Force Base with the 22nd Bombardment Wing as a weapons loading trainer. The museum aircraft was declared surplus at March AFB when it developed weakness in the rear fuselage and was assigned to the museum. This aircraft is on loan from the USAF.

In space there is a need for a small vehicle capable of transporting loads of top-secret liquids and minerals at high speed. After loading the precious merchandise into its compartment, it sets off at great speed to deliver it to the Space Control Center.

The vehicle is based on the famous Italian "APE", transformed for the occasion into a very fast spedeer thanks to its powerful engines.

 

The nostalgia of the 80s and the love for Classic Space make me travel in the imagination and everything can be transformed into something spatial !!

 

This little MOC participates in the third contest for 90 years of LEGO on the LEGO Ideas platform at this link:

ideas.lego.com/challenges/8f551f3c-0554-4b9b-a1a6-8dc61e9...

During World War II, both Great Britain and Germany had experimented with very large glider designs (the Hamlicar and Gigant, respectively) capable of carrying tanks. Though glider assaults had varied results during the war, the US Air Force briefly considered resurrecting the idea in 1948, and commissioned Chase Aircraft to build a large glider, the XCG-20 Avitruc. The XCG-20 was of all-metal construction, with a fully-equipped flight deck and a rear-mounted loading ramp for vehicles to be driven directly into the fuselage. The USAF abandoned the idea of glider assaults soon after the first XCG-20 was completed, but Chase had anticipated this: through the simple installation of two propeller-driven engines, the XCG-20 became the XC-123. This itself was considered only an interim design, as the XC-123A had four turbojet engines, becoming the first all-jet transport aircraft.

 

The USAF rejected the XC-123A, as it was found to have poor performance and short range, owing to the thirsty jets of the early 1950s. However, the piston-engined XC-123 showed promise, and the USAF ordered it into production in 1953. Production was delayed due to Chase Aircraft being acquired by Kaiser, who in turn sold the design to Fairchild Aircraft, who would produce it as the C-123B Provider.

 

The C-123 was considered a supplemental aircraft to the C-119 Flying Boxcar already in service and the soon-to-be-deployed C-130 Hercules. It had better single-engine performance than the C-119, and acquired a reputation for reliability, rugged design, simple maintenance, and the ability to land almost anywhere. A small number were converted to C-123J standard, with ski landing gear for operations in Antarctica and Greenland, and experiments were even made to convert it to an amphibian. Nevertheless, the number of C-123s in service were small compared to other types, and the C-130 began replacing it beginning in 1958.

 

As the United States involved itself more in the Vietnam War, one major advantage of its Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army adversaries was the very jungle of Vietnam itself, which provided ready-made cover and camouflage from American air units. In an attempt to deprive the VC/NVA of jungle cover in known concentration areas, the USAF converted a number of C-123s to UC-123 standard, with spraying equipment for the pesticide Agent Orange. Under Operation Ranch Hand, UC-123s were among the first USAF aircraft deployed to Vietnam, and the first USAF aircraft lost in combat was a UC-123B. Spraying Agent Orange was very dangerous work, as it involved flying low and slow over hostile territory; it would not be until after the Vietnam War was over that it was learned that Agent Orange, used in the concentrated quantity employed in Vietnam, was also a deadly carcinogenic.

 

Besides their controversial employment as defoilant sprayers, standard C-123s were used as transports and Candlestick flareships, as the C-130 demand was exceeding supply, and the US Army’s CV-2 (later C-8) Caribous were proving the worth of a short-takeoff and landing transport. To improve the Provider’s performance in the “hot and high” conditions of Vietnam, two J85 turbojets were added beneath the wings of the C-123K variant, which became the final Provider variant and the main type used in Vietnam. CIA-flown Providers were used by Air America to clandestinely supply friendly Hmong tribes in Laos and in Cambodia. 54 C-123s were lost in Vietnam, second only to the C-130.

 

Following the end of American involvement in Vietnam, the C-123Ks were either handed over to South Vietnam or relegated to USAF Reserve and Air National Guard units, from which they were finally withdrawn around 1980. A few UC-123Ks were used to spray insecticides in Alaska and Guam as late as 1982. 11 other air forces used Providers, and the last C-123s were retired from the South Korean Air Force in 2001. 27 are preserved as museum pieces and a few remain in revenue service as “bush” aircraft in Alaska and elsewhere; remaining aircraft in storage were scrapped due to Agent Orange contamination.

 

55-4533 was delivered to the USAF's 513th Troop Carrier Group at Sewart AFB, Tennessee in 1957; after Sewart closed, the 513th moved to Pope AFB, North Carolina. In 1964, it was transferred to the 1st Air Commando Wing at Eglin AFB, Florida in anticipation of deployment to Southeast Asia--which happened in 1966, when 55-4533 was sent to the 375th Combat Support Group at Tan Son Nhut, South Vietnam. The aircraft would remain in Vietnam until 1971, serving in the transport and flareship role with the 375th and the 315th Special Operations Wing at Phan Rang. As American involvement wound down, 55-4533 returned to the United States, assigned to the 906th Tactical Airlift Group (Reserve) at Lockbourne AFB, Ohio. It was retired in 1981 and donated to the Castle Air Museum.

 

55-4533 was restored to its Vietnam appearance, with the name and nose art of "Hog Hauler"--either a commentary on the C-123's handling, or the cargo the Providers sometimes carried on Operation Mule Train missions over South Vietnam. Though its SEA camouflage has faded considerably, at least this is one Vietnam veteran C-123 that has found a honorable retirement in a museum.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The English Electric Skyspark was a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It remains the only UK-designed-and-built fighter capable of Mach 2. The Skyspark was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric, which was later merged into the newly-formed British Aircraft Corporation. Later the type was marketed as the BAC Skyspark.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 program. W.E.W. "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, was a keen early proponent of Britain's need to develop a supersonic fighter aircraft. In 1947, Petter approached the Ministry of Supply (MoS) with his proposal, and in response Specification ER.103 was issued for a single research aircraft, which was to be capable of flight at Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with F W "Freddie" Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, it had a 40° swept wing to keep the leading edge clear of the Mach cone. To mount enough power into the airframe, two engines were installed, in an unusual, stacked layout and with a high tailplane This proposal was submitted in November 1948, and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mock-up.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance. To achieve Mach 2 the wing sweep was increased to 60° with the ailerons moved to the wingtips. In late 1949, low-speed wind tunnel tests showed that a vortex was generated by the wing which caused a large downwash on the initial high tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1. In 1949, the Ministry of Supply had issued Specification F23/49, which expanded upon the scope of ER103 to include fighter-level manoeuvring. On 1 April 1950, English Electric received a contract for two flying airframes, as well as one static airframe, designated P.1.

 

The Royal Aircraft Establishment disagreed with Petter's choice of sweep angle (60 degrees) and the stacked engine layout, as well as the low tailplane position, was considered to be dangerous, too. To assess the effects of wing sweep and tailplane position on the stability and control of Petter's design Short Brothers were issued a contract, by the Ministry of Supply, to produce the Short SB.5 in mid-1950. This was a low-speed research aircraft that could test sweep angles from 50 to 69 degrees and tailplane positions high or low. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one. The proposed 60-degree wing sweep was retained, but the stacked engines had to give way to a more conventional configuration with two engines placed side-by-side in the tail, but still breathing through a mutual nose air intake.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury. These aircraft had been assigned the aircraft serials WG760, WG763, and WG765 (the structural test airframe). The prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, as the selected Rolls-Royce Avon engines had fallen behind schedule due to their own development problems. Since there was not much space in the fuselage for fuel, the thin wings became the primary fuel tanks and since they also provided space for the stowed main undercarriage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance. The narrow tires housed in the thin wings rapidly wore out if there was any crosswind component during take-off or landing. Outwardly, the prototypes looked very much like the production series, but they were distinguished by the rounded-triangular air intake with no center-body at the nose, short fin, and lack of operational equipment.

 

On 9 June 1952, it was decided that there would be a second phase of prototypes built to develop the aircraft toward achieving Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h); these were designated P.1B while the initial three prototypes were retroactively reclassified as P.1A. P.1B was a significant improvement on P.1A. While it was similar in aerodynamics, structure and control systems, it incorporated extensive alterations to the forward fuselage, reheated Rolls Royce Avon R24R engines, a conical center body inlet cone, variable nozzle reheat and provision for weapons systems integrated with the ADC and AI.23 radar. Three P.1B prototypes were built, assigned serials XA847, XA853 and XA856.

 

In May 1954, WG760 and its support equipment were moved to RAF Boscombe Down for pre-flight ground taxi trials; on the morning of 4 August 1954, WG760 flew for the first time from Boscombe Down. One week later, WG760 officially achieved supersonic flight for the first time, having exceeded the speed of sound during its third flight. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was plagued by directional stability problems and a dismal performance: Transonic drag was much higher than expected, and the aircraft was limited to Mach 0.98 (i.e. subsonic), with a ceiling of just 48,000 ft (14,630 m), far below the requirements.

 

To solve the problem and save the P.1, Petter embarked on a major redesign, incorporating the recently discovered area rule, while at the same time simplifying production and maintenance. The redesign entailed a new, narrower canopy, a revised air intake, a pair of stabilizing fins under the rear fuselage, and a shallow ventral fairing at the wings’ trailing edge that not only reduced the drag coefficient along the wing/fuselage intersection, it also provided space for additional fuel.

On 4 April 1957 the modified P.1B (XA847) made the first flight, immediately exceeding Mach 1. During the early flight trials of the P.1B, speeds in excess of 1,000 mph were achieved daily.

In late October 1958, the plane was officially presented. The event was celebrated in traditional style in a hangar at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough, with the prototype XA847 having the name ‘Skyspark’ freshly painted on the nose in front of the RAF Roundel, which almost covered it. A bottle of champagne was put beside the nose on a special rig which allowed the bottle to safely be smashed against the side of the aircraft.

On 25 November 1958 the P.1B XA847 reached Mach 2 for the first time. This made it the second Western European aircraft to reach Mach 2, the first one being the French Dassault Mirage III just over a month earlier on 24 October 1958

 

The first operational Skyspark, designated Skyspark F.1, was designed as a pure interceptor to defend the V Force airfields in conjunction with the "last ditch" Bristol Bloodhound missiles located either at the bomber airfield, e.g. at RAF Marham, or at dedicated missile sites near to the airfield, e.g. at RAF Woodhall Spa near the Vulcan station RAF Coningsby. The bomber airfields, along with the dispersal airfields, would be the highest priority targets in the UK for enemy nuclear weapons. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range – originally a radius of operation of only 150 miles (240 km) from the V bomber airfields was specified – and endurance. Armament consisted of a pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit, and two pylons for IR-guided de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles were added to the lower fuselage flanks. These hardpoints could, alternatively, carry pods with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets. The Ferranti AI.23 onboard radar provided missile guidance and ranging, as well as search and track functions.

 

The next two Skyspark variants, the Skyspark F.1A and F.2, incorporated relatively minor design changes, but for the next variant, the Skyspark F.3, they were more extensive: The F.3 had higher thrust Rolls-Royce Avon 301R engines, a larger squared-off fin that improved directional stability at high speed further and a strengthened inlet cone allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were all limited to Mach 1.7 (2,083 km/h). An upgraded A.I.23B radar and new, radar-guided Red Top missiles offered a forward hemisphere attack capability, even though additional electronics meant that the ADEN guns had to be deleted – but they were not popular in their position in front of the windscreen, because the muzzle flash blinded the pilot upon firing. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Skyspark yet, but this came at a steep price: higher fuel consumption, resulting in even shorter range. From this basis, a conversion trainer with a side-by-side cockpit, the T.4, was created.

 

The next interceptor variant was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3's shortcomings, the F.3A. The F.3A introduced two major improvements: a larger, non-jettisonable, 610-imperial-gallon (2,800 L) ventral fuel tank, resulting in a much deeper and longer belly fairing, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge. The conically cambered wing improved manoeuvrability, especially at higher altitudes, and it offered space for a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel by 716 imperial gallons (3,260 L). The enlarged ventral tank not only nearly doubled available fuel, it also provided space at its front end for a re-instated pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon with 120 RPG. Alternatively, a retractable pack with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets could be installed, or a set of cameras for reconnaissance missions. The F.3A also introduced an improved A.I.23B radar and the new IR-guided Red Top missile, which was much faster and had greater range and manoeuvrability than the Firestreak. Its improved infrared seeker enabled a wider range of engagement angles and offered a forward hemisphere attack capability that would allow the Skyspark to attack even faster bombers (like the new, supersonic Tupolev T-22 Blinder) through a collision-course approach.

Wings and the new belly tank were also immediately incorporated in a second trainer variant, the T.5.

 

The ultimate variant, the Skyspark F.6, was nearly identical to the F.3A, with the exception that it could carry two additional 260-imperial-gallon (1,200 L) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability, even though their supersonic drag was so high that the extra fuel would only marginally raise the aircraft’s range when flying beyond the sound barrier for extended periods.

 

Finally, there was the Skyspark F.2A; it was an early production F.2 upgraded with the new cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 imperial gallons (2,800 L) ventral tank. However, the F.2A retained the old AI.23 radar, the IR-guided Firestreak missile and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Skysparks, it had the longest tactical range of all variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over West Germany.

 

The first Skysparks to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, joining the Air Fighting Development Squadron (AFDS) of the Central Fighter Establishment, where they were used to clear the Skyspark for entry into service. The production Skyspark F.1 entered service with the AFDS in May 1960, allowing the unit to take part in the air defence exercise "Yeoman" later that month. The Skyspark F.1 entered frontline squadron service with 74 Squadron at Coltishall from 11 July 1960. This made the Skyspark the second Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the second fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe (the first one in both categories being the Swedish Saab 35 Draken on 8 March 1960 four months earlier).

 

The aircraft's radar and missiles proved to be effective, and pilots reported that the Skyspark was easy to fly. However, in the first few months of operation the aircraft's serviceability was extremely poor. This was due to the complexity of the aircraft systems and shortages of spares and ground support equipment. Even when the Skyspark was not grounded by technical faults, the RAF initially struggled to get more than 20 flying hours per aircraft per month compared with the 40 flying hours that English Electric believed could be achieved with proper support. In spite of these concerns, within six months of the Skyspark entering service, 74 Squadron was able to achieve 100 flying hours per aircraft.

 

Deliveries of the slightly improved Skyspark F.1A, with revised avionics and provision for an air-to-air refueling probe, allowed two more squadrons, 56 and 111 Squadron, both based at RAF Wattisham, to convert to the Skyspark in 1960–1961. The Skyspark F.1 was only ordered in limited numbers and served only for a short time; nonetheless, it was viewed as a significant step forward in Britain's air defence capabilities. Following their replacement from frontline duties by the introduction of successively improved Skyspark variants, the remaining F.1 aircraft were employed by the Skyspark Conversion Squadron.

The improved F.2 entered service with 19 Squadron at the end of 1962 and 92 Squadron in early 1963. Conversion of these two squadrons was aided by the of the two-seat T.4 and T.5 trainers (based on the F.3 and F.3A/F.6 fighters), which entered service with the Skyspark Conversion Squadron (later renamed 226 Operational Conversion Unit) in June 1962. While the OCU was the major user of the two-seater, small numbers were also allocated to the front-line fighter squadrons. More F.2s were produced than there were available squadron slots, so later production aircraft were stored for years before being used operationally; some of these Skyspark F.2s were converted to F.2As.

 

The F.3, with more powerful engines and the new Red Top missile was expected to be the definitive Skyspark, and at one time it was planned to equip ten squadrons, with the remaining two squadrons retaining the F.2. However, the F.3 also had only a short operational life and was withdrawn from service early due to defence cutbacks and the introduction of the even more capable and longer-range F.6, some of which were converted F.3s.

 

The introduction of the F.3 and F.6 allowed the RAF to progressively reequip squadrons operating aircraft such as the subsonic Gloster Javelin and retire these types during the mid-1960s. During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Skyspark's range and firepower shortcomings became increasingly apparent. The transfer of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs from Royal Navy service enabled these much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAF's interceptor force, alongside those withdrawn from Germany as they were replaced by SEPECAT Jaguars in the ground attack role.

The Skyspark's direct replacement was the Tornado F.3, an interceptor variant of the Panavia Tornado. The Tornado featured several advantages over the Skyspark, including far larger weapons load and considerably more advanced avionics. Skysparks were slowly phased out of service between 1974 and 1988, even though they lasted longer than expected because the definitive Tornado F.3 went through serious teething troubles and its service introduction was delayed several times. In their final years, the Skysparks’ airframes required considerable maintenance to keep them airworthy due to the sheer number of accumulated flight hours.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 51 ft 2 in (15,62 m) fuselage only

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14,092 kg) with armament and no fuel

Gross weight: 41,076 lb (18,632 kg) with two Red Tops, ammunition, and internal fuel

Max. takeoff weight: 45,750 lb (20,752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojet engines,

12,690 lbf (56.4 kN) thrust each dry, 16,360 lbf (72.8 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph+ at 40,000 ft)

Range: 738 nmi (849 mi, 1,367 km)

Combat range: 135 nmi (155 mi, 250 km) supersonic intercept radius

Range: 800 nmi (920 mi, 1,500 km) with internal fuel

1,100 nmi (1,300 mi; 2,000 km) with external overwing tanks

Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

Zoom ceiling: 70,000 ft (21,000 m)

Rate of climb: 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s) sustained to 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

Time to altitude: 2.8 min to 36,000 ft (11,000 m)

Wing loading: 76 lb/sq ft (370 kg/m²) with two AIM-9 and 1/2 fuel

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) ADEN cannon with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage

2× forward fuselage hardpoints for a single Firestreak or Red Top AAM each

2× overwing pylon stations for 2.000 lb (907 kg each)

for 260 imp gal (310 US gal; 1,200 l) ferry tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was a submission to the “Hunter, Lightning, Canberra” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and one of my personal ultimate challenges – a project that you think about very often, but the you put the thought back into its box when you realize that turning this idea into hardware will be a VERY tedious, complex and work-intensive task. But the thematic group build was the perfect occasion to eventually tackle the idea of a model of a “side-by-side engine BAC Lightning”, a.k.a. “Flatning”, as a rather conservative alternative to the real aircraft’s unique and unusual design with stacked engines in the fuselage, which brought a multitude of other design consequences that led to a really unique aircraft.

 

And it sound so simple: take a Lightning, just change the tail section. But it’s not that simple, because the whole fuselage shape would be different, resulting in less depth, the wings have to be attached somewhere and somehow, the landing gear might have to be adjusted/shortened, and how the fuselage diameter shape changes along the hull, so that you get a more or less smooth shape, was also totally uncertain!

 

Initially I considered a MiG Ye-152 as a body donor, but that was rejected due to the sheer price of the only available kit (ModelSvit). A Chinese Shenyang J-8I would also have been ideal – but there’s not 1:72 kit of this aircraft around, just of its successor with side intakes, a 1:72 J-8II from trumpeter.

I eventually decided to keep costs low, and I settled for the shaggy PM Model Su-15 (marketed as Su-21) “Flagon” as main body donor: it’s cheap, the engines have a good size for Avons and the pen nib fairing has a certain retro touch that goes well with the Lightning’s Fifties design.

The rest of this "Flatning" came from a Hasegawa 1:72 BAC Lightning F.6 (Revell re-boxing).

 

Massive modifications were necessary and lots of PSR. In an initial step the Flagon lost its lower wing halves, which are an integral part of the lower fuselage half. The cockpit section was cut away where the intake ducts begin. The Lightning had its belly tank removed (set aside for a potential later re-installation), and dry-fitting and crude measures suggested that only the cockpit section from the Lightning, its spine and the separate fin would make it onto the new fuselage.

 

Integrating the parts was tough, though! The problem that caused the biggest headaches: how to create a "smooth" fuselage from the Lightning's rounded front end with a single nose intake that originally develops into a narrow, vertical hull, combined with the boxy and rather wide Flagon fuselage with large Phantom-esque intakes? My solution: taking out deep wedges from all (rather massive) hull parts along the intake ducts, bend the leftover side walls inwards and glue them into place, so that the width becomes equal with the Lightning's cockpit section. VERY crude and massive body work!

 

However, the Lightning's cockpit section for the following hull with stacked engines is much deeper than the Flagon's side-by-side layout. My initial idea was to place the cockpit section higher, but I would have had to transplant a part of the Lightning's upper fuselage (with the spine on top, too!) onto the "flat" Flagon’s back. But this would have looked VERY weird, and I'd have had to bridge the round ventral shape of the Lightning into the boxy Flagon underside, too. This was no viable option, so that the cockpit section had to be further modified; I cut away the whole ventral cockpit section, at the height of the lower intake lip. Similar to my former Austrian Hasegawa Lightning, I also cut away the vertical bulkhead directly behind the intake opening - even though I did not improve the cockpit with a better tub with side consoles. At the back end, the Flagon's jet exhausts were opened and received afterburner dummies inside as a cosmetic upgrade.

 

Massive PSR work followed all around the hull. The now-open area under the cockpit was filled with lead beads to keep the front wheel down, and I implanted a landing gear well (IIRC, it's from an Xtrakit Swift). With the fuselage literally taking shape, the wings were glued together and the locator holes for the overwing tanks filled, because they would not be mounted.

 

To mount the wings to the new hull, crude measurements suggested that wedges had to be cut away from the Lightning's wing roots to match the weird fuselage shape. They were then glued to the shoulders, right behind the cockpit due to the reduced fuselage depth. At this stage, the Lightning’s stabilizer attachment points were transplanted, so that they end up in a similar low position on the rounded Su-15 tail. Again, lots of PSR…

 

At this stage I contemplated the next essential step: belly tank or not? The “Flatning” would have worked without it, but its profile would look rather un-Lightning-ish and rather “flat”. On the other side, a conformal tank would probably look quite strange on the new wide and flat ventral fuselage...? Only experiments could yield an answer, so I glued together the leftover belly bulge parts from the Hasegawa kit and played around with it. I considered a new, wider belly tank, but I guess that this would have looked too ugly. I eventually settled upon the narrow F.6 tank and also used the section behind it with the arrestor hook. I just reduced its depth by ~2 mm, with a slight slope towards the rear because I felt (righteously) that the higher wing position would lower the model’s stance. More massive PSR followed….

 

Due to the expected poor ground clearance, the Lightning’s stabilizing ventral fins were mounted directly under the fuselage edges rather than on the belly tank. Missile pylons for Red Tops were mounted to the lower front fuselage, similar to the real arrangement, and cable fairings, scratched from styrene profiles, were added to the lower flanks, stretching the hull optically and giving more structure to the hull.

 

To my surprise, I did not have to shorten the landing gear’s main legs! The wings ended up a little higher on the fuselage than on the original Lightning, and the front wheel sits a bit further back and deeper inside of its donor well, too, so that the fuselage comes probably 2 mm closer to the ground than an OOB Lightning model. Just like on the real aircraft, ground clearance is marginal, but when the main wheels were finally in place, the model turned out to have a low but proper stance, a little F8U-ish.

  

Painting and markings:

I was uncertain about the livery for a long time – I just had already settled upon an RAF aircraft. But the model would not receive a late low-viz scheme (the Levin, my mono-engine Lightning build already had one), and no NMF, either. I was torn between an RAF Germany all-green over NMF undersides livery, but eventually went for a pretty standard RAF livery in Dark Sea Grey/Dark Green over NMF undersides, with toned-down post-war roundels.

A factor that spoke in favor of this route was a complete set of markings for an RAF 11 Squadron Lightning F.6 in such a guise on an Xtradecal set, which also featured dayglo orange makings on fin, wings and stabilizers – quite unusual, and a nice contrast detail on the otherwise very conservative livery. All stencils were taken from the OOB Revell sheet for the Lightning. Just the tactical code “F” on the tail was procured elsewhere, it comes from a Matchbox BAC Lightning’s sheet.

 

After basic painting the model received the usual black ink washing, some post-panel-shading and also a light treatment with graphite to create soot strains around the jet exhausts and the gun ports, and to emphasize the raised panel lines on the Hasegawa parts.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final bits and pieces like the landing gear and the Red Tops (taken OOB) were mounted.

  

A major effort, and I have seriously depleted my putty stocks for this build! However, the result looks less spectacular than it actually is: changing a Lightning from its literally original stacked engine layout into a more conservative side-by-side arrangement turned out to be possible, even though the outcome is not really pretty. But it works and is feasible!

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.

 

As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.

 

The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.

 

The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.

 

Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).

 

However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.

 

Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.

 

The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.

 

The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.

As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.

 

Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.

 

With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position

15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot

Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)

Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;

plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)

1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)

Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks

Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)

Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)

Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

No internal guns.

4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,

plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)

AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.

 

However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.

 

The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.

 

Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.

On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.

The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.

 

Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.

 

The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.

  

Painting and markings:

No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.

 

Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).

The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).

The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.

 

After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).

 

The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.

  

The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.

Heavy Equipment Transporters (HET's) are capable of carrying a 70-ton Main Battle Tank on board. They can move their load rapidly and cost-effectively, saving wear and tear on the tracks – and the roads. The semi-trailers are equipped with a heavy-duty winch – giving an all-up weight of 104 tons.

 

The new Heavy Equipment Transporter is the most powerful tank transporter in production. It consists of an Oshkosh 1070F 8x8 tractor truck and a King Trailer GTS 100 seven axle semi-trailer.

 

The fully integrated power pack, comprises of a Caterpillar C18 after-cooled, turbocharged diesel engine developing 700hp, and is linked through to an electronically controlled X300 transmission unit.

 

The HET pictured, is seen departing Trowle Services on the M1 Motorway in Nottinghamshire. Note the multi-rear wheel steering on the semi-trailer.

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (Russian: Микоян и Гуревич МиГ-19) (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engined fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. It was, more oe less, the counterpart of the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", which was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines (a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3) with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 1) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 0.97) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

The new fighter, internally designated "SM-1", was designed around the "SI-02" airframe (a MiG-17 prototype) modified to accept two engines in a side-by-side arrangement and was completed in March 1952.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph) (compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) in the MiG-15), combined with absence of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5.500 MiG-19s were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

All Soviet-built MiG-19 variants were single-seaters only, although the Chinese later developed the JJ-6 trainer version of the Shenyang J-6. Among the original "Farmer" variants were also several radar-equipped all-weather fighters and the MiG-19R, a reconnaissance version of the MiG-19S with cameras replacing the nose cannon in a canoe-shaped fairing under the forward fuselage and powered by uprated RD-9BF-1 engines with about 10% more dry thrust and an improved afterburner system.

 

The MiG19R was intended for low/medium altitude photo reconnaissance. Four AFA-39 daylight cameras (one facing forward, one vertical and two obliquely mounted) were carried. Nighttime operations were only enabled through flare bombs, up to four could be carried on four hardpoints under the wings, even though the outer "wet" pylons were frequently occupied by a pair of 800l drop tanks.

 

The MiG-19R was not produced in large numbers and only a few were operated outside of the Soviet Union. The NATO reporting name remained unchanged (Farmer C). A recon variant of the MiG-19 stayed on many air forces' agendas, even though only the original, Soviet type was actually produced. Czechoslovakia developed an indigenous reconnaissance variant, but it did not enter series production, as well as Chinese J-6 variants, which only reached the prototype stage.

 

One of the MiG-19R's few foreign operators was the Polish Navy. The Polish Air Force had received a total of 22 MiG-19P and 14 MiG-19PM interceptors in 1957 (locally dubbed Lim-7), and at that time photo reconnaissance for both Air Force and Navy was covered by a version of the MiG-17 (Lim-5R). Especially the Polish Navy was interested in a faster aircraft for quick identification missions over the Baltic Sea, and so six MiG-19R from Soviet stock were bought in 1960 for the Polish Navy air arm.

 

Anyway, Poland generally regarded the MiG-19 family only as an interim solution until more potent types like the MiG-21 became available. Therefore, most of the fighters were already sold to Bulgaria in 1965/66, and any remaining Farmer fighters in Polish Air Force Service were phased out by 1974.

 

The Polish Navy MiG-19R were kept in service until 1982 through the 3rd Group of the 7th Polish Naval Squadron (PLS), even though only a quartet remained since two Lim-7R, how the type was called in Poland, had been lost through accidents during the early 70ies. Ironically, the older Lim6R (a domestic photo reconnaissance variant of the license-built MiG-17 fighter bomber) was even kept in service until the late 80ies, but eventually all these aircraft were replaced by MiG-21R and Su-22M4R.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: One

Length: 12.54 m (41 ft)

Wingspan: 9.0 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.9 m (12 ft 10 in)

Wing area: 25.0 m² (270 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,447 kg (11,983 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 7,560 kg (16,632 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Tumansky RD-9BF-1 afterburning turbojets, 31.9 kN (7,178 lbf) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1.500 km/h (930 mph)

Range: 1,390 km (860 mi) 2,200 km with external tanks

Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,425 ft/min)

Wing loading: 302.4 kg/m² (61.6 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

2x 30 mm NR-30 cannons in the wing roots with 75 RPG

4x underwing pylons, with a maximum load of 1.000 kg (2.205 lb);

typically only 2 drop tanks were carried, or pods with flare missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

Again, a rather subtle whif. The MiG-19R existed, but was only produced in small numbers and AFAIK only operated by the Soviet Union. Conversions of license-built machines in Czechoslovakia and China never went it beyond prototype stage.

 

Beyond that, there’s no kit of the recon variant, even pictures of real aircraft are hard to find for refefence – so I decided to convert a vintage Kovozavody/KP Models MiG-19S fighter from the pile into this exotic Farmer variant.

 

Overall, the old KP kit is not bad at all, even though you get raised details, lots of flash and mediocre fit, the pilot's seat is rather funny. Yes, today’s standards are different, but anything you could ask for is there. The kit is more complete than a lot of more modern offerings and the resulting representation of a MiG-19 is IMHO good.

 

Mods I made are minimal. Most prominent feature is the camera fairing in place of the fuselage cannon, scratched from a massive weapon pylon (Academy F-104G). Probably turned out a bit too large and pronounced, but it’s whifworld, after all!

 

Other detail changes include new main wheels (from a Revell G.91), some added/scratched details in the cockpit with an opened canopy, and extra air scoops on the fuselage for the uprated engines. The drop tanks are OOB, I just added the small stabilizer pylons from styrene sheet.

 

Other pimp additions are scratched cannons (made from Q-Tips!), and inside of the exhausts the rear wall was drilled up and afterburner dummies (wheels from a Panzer IV) inserted - even though you can hardly see that at all...

  

Painting and markings:

This is where the fun actually begins. ANY of the few MiG-19 in Polish service I have ever seen was left in a bare metal finish, and the Polish Navy actually never operated the type.

 

Anyway, the naval forces make a good excuse for a camouflaged machine – and the fact that the naval service used rather complex patterns with weird colors on its machines (e. g. on MiG-17, MiG-15 UTI or PZL Iskras and An-2) made this topic even more interesting, and colorful.

 

My paint scheme is a mix of various real world aircraft “designs”. Four(!) upper colors were typical. I ended up with:

• Dark Grey (FS 36118, Modelmaster)

• Dark Green (RAF Dark Green, Modelmaster)

• Blue-Green-Grey (Fulcrum Green-Grey, Modelmaster)

• Greenish Ochre (a mix of Humbrol 84 and Zinc Chromate Green, Modelmaster)

 

Plus…

• Light Blue undersides (FS 35414, Modelmaster, also taken into the air intake)

  

The pattern was basically lent from an Iskra trainer and translated onto the swept wing MiG. The scheme is in so far noteworthy because the stabilizers carry the upper camo scheme on the undersides, too!?

 

I only did light shading and weathering, since all Polish Navy service aircraft I found had a arther clean and pristine look. A light black ink wash helped to emphasize the many fine raised panel lines, as well as some final overall dry painting with light grey.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in the notorious “Russian Cockpit Blue-Green” (Modelmaster), dashboard and are behind the seat were painted medium grey (FS 36231). The landing gear wells were kept in Aluminum (Humbrol 56), while the struts received a lighter acrylic Aluminum from Revell.

The wheel discs were painted bright green (Humbrol 131), but with the other shocking colors around that does not stand out at all…! The engine nozzles were treated with Modelmaster Metallizer, including Steel, Gun Metal and Titanium, plus some grinded graphite which adds an extra metallic shine.

 

The national “checkerboard” markings were puzzled together from various old decal sheets; the red tactical code was made with single digit decals (from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet); the squadron marking on the fin is fictional, the bird scaring eyes are a strange but als typical addition and I added some few stencils.

 

Finally, all was sealed under a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Revell).

  

In the end, not a simple whif with only little conversion surgery. But the paint scheme is rather original, if not psychedelic – this MiG looks as if a six-year-old had painted it, but it’s pretty true to reality and I can imagine that it is even very effective in an environment like the Baltic Sea.

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.

 

As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.

 

The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.

 

The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.

 

Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).

 

However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.

 

Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.

 

The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.

 

The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.

As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.

 

Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.

 

With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position

15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot

Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)

Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;

plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)

1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)

Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks

Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)

Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)

Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

No internal guns.

4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,

plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)

AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.

 

However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.

 

The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.

 

Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.

On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.

The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.

 

Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.

 

The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.

  

Painting and markings:

No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.

 

Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).

The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).

The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.

 

After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).

 

The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.

  

The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.

Colosseum

Following, a text, in english, from the Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia:

The Colosseum, or the Coliseum, originally the Flavian Amphitheatre (Latin: Amphitheatrum Flavium, Italian Anfiteatro Flavio or Colosseo), is an elliptical amphitheatre in the centre of the city of Rome, Italy, the largest ever built in the Roman Empire. It is considered one of the greatest works of Roman architecture and Roman engineering.

Occupying a site just east of the Roman Forum, its construction started between 70 and 72 AD[1] under the emperor Vespasian and was completed in 80 AD under Titus,[2] with further modifications being made during Domitian's reign (81–96).[3] The name "Amphitheatrum Flavium" derives from both Vespasian's and Titus's family name (Flavius, from the gens Flavia).

Capable of seating 50,000 spectators,[1][4][5] the Colosseum was used for gladiatorial contests and public spectacles such as mock sea battles, animal hunts, executions, re-enactments of famous battles, and dramas based on Classical mythology. The building ceased to be used for entertainment in the early medieval era. It was later reused for such purposes as housing, workshops, quarters for a religious order, a fortress, a quarry, and a Christian shrine.

Although in the 21st century it stays partially ruined because of damage caused by devastating earthquakes and stone-robbers, the Colosseum is an iconic symbol of Imperial Rome. It is one of Rome's most popular tourist attractions and still has close connections with the Roman Catholic Church, as each Good Friday the Pope leads a torchlit "Way of the Cross" procession that starts in the area around the Colosseum.[6]

The Colosseum is also depicted on the Italian version of the five-cent euro coin.

The Colosseum's original Latin name was Amphitheatrum Flavium, often anglicized as Flavian Amphitheater. The building was constructed by emperors of the Flavian dynasty, hence its original name, after the reign of Emperor Nero.[7] This name is still used in modern English, but generally the structure is better known as the Colosseum. In antiquity, Romans may have referred to the Colosseum by the unofficial name Amphitheatrum Caesareum; this name could have been strictly poetic.[8][9] This name was not exclusive to the Colosseum; Vespasian and Titus, builders of the Colosseum, also constructed an amphitheater of the same name in Puteoli (modern Pozzuoli).[10]

The name Colosseum has long been believed to be derived from a colossal statue of Nero nearby.[3] (the statue of Nero itself being named after one of the original ancient wonders, the Colossus of Rhodes[citation needed]. This statue was later remodeled by Nero's successors into the likeness of Helios (Sol) or Apollo, the sun god, by adding the appropriate solar crown. Nero's head was also replaced several times with the heads of succeeding emperors. Despite its pagan links, the statue remained standing well into the medieval era and was credited with magical powers. It came to be seen as an iconic symbol of the permanence of Rome.

In the 8th century, a famous epigram attributed to the Venerable Bede celebrated the symbolic significance of the statue in a prophecy that is variously quoted: Quamdiu stat Colisæus, stat et Roma; quando cadet colisæus, cadet et Roma; quando cadet Roma, cadet et mundus ("as long as the Colossus stands, so shall Rome; when the Colossus falls, Rome shall fall; when Rome falls, so falls the world").[11] This is often mistranslated to refer to the Colosseum rather than the Colossus (as in, for instance, Byron's poem Childe Harold's Pilgrimage). However, at the time that the Pseudo-Bede wrote, the masculine noun coliseus was applied to the statue rather than to what was still known as the Flavian amphitheatre.

The Colossus did eventually fall, possibly being pulled down to reuse its bronze. By the year 1000 the name "Colosseum" had been coined to refer to the amphitheatre. The statue itself was largely forgotten and only its base survives, situated between the Colosseum and the nearby Temple of Venus and Roma.[12]

The name further evolved to Coliseum during the Middle Ages. In Italy, the amphitheatre is still known as il Colosseo, and other Romance languages have come to use similar forms such as le Colisée (French), el Coliseo (Spanish) and o Coliseu (Portuguese).

Construction of the Colosseum began under the rule of the Emperor Vespasian[3] in around 70–72AD. The site chosen was a flat area on the floor of a low valley between the Caelian, Esquiline and Palatine Hills, through which a canalised stream ran. By the 2nd century BC the area was densely inhabited. It was devastated by the Great Fire of Rome in AD 64, following which Nero seized much of the area to add to his personal domain. He built the grandiose Domus Aurea on the site, in front of which he created an artificial lake surrounded by pavilions, gardens and porticoes. The existing Aqua Claudia aqueduct was extended to supply water to the area and the gigantic bronze Colossus of Nero was set up nearby at the entrance to the Domus Aurea.[12]

Although the Colossus was preserved, much of the Domus Aurea was torn down. The lake was filled in and the land reused as the location for the new Flavian Amphitheatre. Gladiatorial schools and other support buildings were constructed nearby within the former grounds of the Domus Aurea. According to a reconstructed inscription found on the site, "the emperor Vespasian ordered this new amphitheatre to be erected from his general's share of the booty." This is thought to refer to the vast quantity of treasure seized by the Romans following their victory in the Great Jewish Revolt in 70AD. The Colosseum can be thus interpreted as a great triumphal monument built in the Roman tradition of celebrating great victories[12], placating the Roman people instead of returning soldiers. Vespasian's decision to build the Colosseum on the site of Nero's lake can also be seen as a populist gesture of returning to the people an area of the city which Nero had appropriated for his own use. In contrast to many other amphitheatres, which were located on the outskirts of a city, the Colosseum was constructed in the city centre; in effect, placing it both literally and symbolically at the heart of Rome.

The Colosseum had been completed up to the third story by the time of Vespasian's death in 79. The top level was finished and the building inaugurated by his son, Titus, in 80.[3] Dio Cassius recounts that over 9,000 wild animals were killed during the inaugural games of the amphitheatre. The building was remodelled further under Vespasian's younger son, the newly designated Emperor Domitian, who constructed the hypogeum, a series of underground tunnels used to house animals and slaves. He also added a gallery to the top of the Colosseum to increase its seating capacity.

In 217, the Colosseum was badly damaged by a major fire (caused by lightning, according to Dio Cassius[13]) which destroyed the wooden upper levels of the amphitheatre's interior. It was not fully repaired until about 240 and underwent further repairs in 250 or 252 and again in 320. An inscription records the restoration of various parts of the Colosseum under Theodosius II and Valentinian III (reigned 425–455), possibly to repair damage caused by a major earthquake in 443; more work followed in 484[14] and 508. The arena continued to be used for contests well into the 6th century, with gladiatorial fights last mentioned around 435. Animal hunts continued until at least 523, when Anicius Maximus celebrated his consulship with some venationes, criticised by King Theodoric the Great for their high cost.

The Colosseum underwent several radical changes of use during the medieval period. By the late 6th century a small church had been built into the structure of the amphitheatre, though this apparently did not confer any particular religious significance on the building as a whole. The arena was converted into a cemetery. The numerous vaulted spaces in the arcades under the seating were converted into housing and workshops, and are recorded as still being rented out as late as the 12th century. Around 1200 the Frangipani family took over the Colosseum and fortified it, apparently using it as a castle.

Severe damage was inflicted on the Colosseum by the great earthquake in 1349, causing the outer south side, lying on a less stable alluvional terrain, to collapse. Much of the tumbled stone was reused to build palaces, churches, hospitals and other buildings elsewhere in Rome. A religious order moved into the northern third of the Colosseum in the mid-14th century and continued to inhabit it until as late as the early 19th century. The interior of the amphitheatre was extensively stripped of stone, which was reused elsewhere, or (in the case of the marble façade) was burned to make quicklime.[12] The bronze clamps which held the stonework together were pried or hacked out of the walls, leaving numerous pockmarks which still scar the building today.

During the 16th and 17th century, Church officials sought a productive role for the vast derelict hulk of the Colosseum. Pope Sixtus V (1585–1590) planned to turn the building into a wool factory to provide employment for Rome's prostitutes, though this proposal fell through with his premature death.[15] In 1671 Cardinal Altieri authorized its use for bullfights; a public outcry caused the idea to be hastily abandoned.

In 1749, Pope Benedict XIV endorsed as official Church policy the view that the Colosseum was a sacred site where early Christians had been martyred. He forbade the use of the Colosseum as a quarry and consecrated the building to the Passion of Christ and installed Stations of the Cross, declaring it sanctified by the blood of the Christian martyrs who perished there (see Christians and the Colosseum). However there is no historical evidence to support Benedict's claim, nor is there even any evidence that anyone prior to the 16th century suggested this might be the case; the Catholic Encyclopedia concludes that there are no historical grounds for the supposition. Later popes initiated various stabilization and restoration projects, removing the extensive vegetation which had overgrown the structure and threatened to damage it further. The façade was reinforced with triangular brick wedges in 1807 and 1827, and the interior was repaired in 1831, 1846 and in the 1930s. The arena substructure was partly excavated in 1810–1814 and 1874 and was fully exposed under Benito Mussolini in the 1930s.

The Colosseum is today one of Rome's most popular tourist attractions, receiving millions of visitors annually. The effects of pollution and general deterioration over time prompted a major restoration programme carried out between 1993 and 2000, at a cost of 40 billion Italian lire ($19.3m / €20.6m at 2000 prices). In recent years it has become a symbol of the international campaign against capital punishment, which was abolished in Italy in 1948. Several anti–death penalty demonstrations took place in front of the Colosseum in 2000. Since that time, as a gesture against the death penalty, the local authorities of Rome change the color of the Colosseum's night time illumination from white to gold whenever a person condemned to the death penalty anywhere in the world gets their sentence commuted or is released,[16] or if a jurisdiction abolishes the death penalty. Most recently, the Colosseum was illuminated in gold when capital punishment was abolished in the American state of New Mexico in April 2009.

Because of the ruined state of the interior, it is impractical to use the Colosseum to host large events; only a few hundred spectators can be accommodated in temporary seating. However, much larger concerts have been held just outside, using the Colosseum as a backdrop. Performers who have played at the Colosseum in recent years have included Ray Charles (May 2002),[18] Paul McCartney (May 2003),[19] Elton John (September 2005),[20] and Billy Joel (July 2006).

Exterior

Unlike earlier Greek theatres that were built into hillsides, the Colosseum is an entirely free-standing structure. It derives its basic exterior and interior architecture from that of two Roman theatres back to back. It is elliptical in plan and is 189 meters (615 ft / 640 Roman feet) long, and 156 meters (510 ft / 528 Roman feet) wide, with a base area of 6 acres (24,000 m2). The height of the outer wall is 48 meters (157 ft / 165 Roman feet). The perimeter originally measured 545 meters (1,788 ft / 1,835 Roman feet). The central arena is an oval 87 m (287 ft) long and 55 m (180 ft) wide, surrounded by a wall 5 m (15 ft) high, above which rose tiers of seating.

The outer wall is estimated to have required over 100,000 cubic meters (131,000 cu yd) of travertine stone which were set without mortar held together by 300 tons of iron clamps.[12] However, it has suffered extensive damage over the centuries, with large segments having collapsed following earthquakes. The north side of the perimeter wall is still standing; the distinctive triangular brick wedges at each end are modern additions, having been constructed in the early 19th century to shore up the wall. The remainder of the present-day exterior of the Colosseum is in fact the original interior wall.

The surviving part of the outer wall's monumental façade comprises three stories of superimposed arcades surmounted by a podium on which stands a tall attic, both of which are pierced by windows interspersed at regular intervals. The arcades are framed by half-columns of the Tuscan, Ionic, and Corinthian orders, while the attic is decorated with Corinthian pilasters.[21] Each of the arches in the second- and third-floor arcades framed statues, probably honoring divinities and other figures from Classical mythology.

Two hundred and forty mast corbels were positioned around the top of the attic. They originally supported a retractable awning, known as the velarium, that kept the sun and rain off spectators. This consisted of a canvas-covered, net-like structure made of ropes, with a hole in the center.[3] It covered two-thirds of the arena, and sloped down towards the center to catch the wind and provide a breeze for the audience. Sailors, specially enlisted from the Roman naval headquarters at Misenum and housed in the nearby Castra Misenatium, were used to work the velarium.[22]

The Colosseum's huge crowd capacity made it essential that the venue could be filled or evacuated quickly. Its architects adopted solutions very similar to those used in modern stadiums to deal with the same problem. The amphitheatre was ringed by eighty entrances at ground level, 76 of which were used by ordinary spectators.[3] Each entrance and exit was numbered, as was each staircase. The northern main entrance was reserved for the Roman Emperor and his aides, whilst the other three axial entrances were most likely used by the elite. All four axial entrances were richly decorated with painted stucco reliefs, of which fragments survive. Many of the original outer entrances have disappeared with the collapse of the perimeter wall, but entrances XXIII (23) to LIV (54) still survive.[12]

Spectators were given tickets in the form of numbered pottery shards, which directed them to the appropriate section and row. They accessed their seats via vomitoria (singular vomitorium), passageways that opened into a tier of seats from below or behind. These quickly dispersed people into their seats and, upon conclusion of the event or in an emergency evacuation, could permit their exit within only a few minutes. The name vomitoria derived from the Latin word for a rapid discharge, from which English derives the word vomit.

Interior

According to the Codex-Calendar of 354, the Colosseum could accommodate 87,000 people, although modern estimates put the figure at around 50,000. They were seated in a tiered arrangement that reflected the rigidly stratified nature of Roman society. Special boxes were provided at the north and south ends respectively for the Emperor and the Vestal Virgins, providing the best views of the arena. Flanking them at the same level was a broad platform or podium for the senatorial class, who were allowed to bring their own chairs. The names of some 5th century senators can still be seen carved into the stonework, presumably reserving areas for their use.

The tier above the senators, known as the maenianum primum, was occupied by the non-senatorial noble class or knights (equites). The next level up, the maenianum secundum, was originally reserved for ordinary Roman citizens (plebians) and was divided into two sections. The lower part (the immum) was for wealthy citizens, while the upper part (the summum) was for poor citizens. Specific sectors were provided for other social groups: for instance, boys with their tutors, soldiers on leave, foreign dignitaries, scribes, heralds, priests and so on. Stone (and later marble) seating was provided for the citizens and nobles, who presumably would have brought their own cushions with them. Inscriptions identified the areas reserved for specific groups.

Another level, the maenianum secundum in legneis, was added at the very top of the building during the reign of Domitian. This comprised a gallery for the common poor, slaves and women. It would have been either standing room only, or would have had very steep wooden benches. Some groups were banned altogether from the Colosseum, notably gravediggers, actors and former gladiators.

Each tier was divided into sections (maeniana) by curved passages and low walls (praecinctiones or baltei), and were subdivided into cunei, or wedges, by the steps and aisles from the vomitoria. Each row (gradus) of seats was numbered, permitting each individual seat to be exactly designated by its gradus, cuneus, and number.

The arena itself was 83 meters by 48 meters (272 ft by 157 ft / 280 by 163 Roman feet).[12] It comprised a wooden floor covered by sand (the Latin word for sand is harena or arena), covering an elaborate underground structure called the hypogeum (literally meaning "underground"). Little now remains of the original arena floor, but the hypogeum is still clearly visible. It consisted of a two-level subterranean network of tunnels and cages beneath the arena where gladiators and animals were held before contests began. Eighty vertical shafts provided instant access to the arena for caged animals and scenery pieces concealed underneath; larger hinged platforms, called hegmata, provided access for elephants and the like. It was restructured on numerous occasions; at least twelve different phases of construction can be seen.[12]

The hypogeum was connected by underground tunnels to a number of points outside the Colosseum. Animals and performers were brought through the tunnel from nearby stables, with the gladiators' barracks at the Ludus Magnus to the east also being connected by tunnels. Separate tunnels were provided for the Emperor and the Vestal Virgins to permit them to enter and exit the Colosseum without needing to pass through the crowds.[12]

Substantial quantities of machinery also existed in the hypogeum. Elevators and pulleys raised and lowered scenery and props, as well as lifting caged animals to the surface for release. There is evidence for the existence of major hydraulic mechanisms[12] and according to ancient accounts, it was possible to flood the arena rapidly, presumably via a connection to a nearby aqueduct.

The Colosseum and its activities supported a substantial industry in the area. In addition to the amphitheatre itself, many other buildings nearby were linked to the games. Immediately to the east is the remains of the Ludus Magnus, a training school for gladiators. This was connected to the Colosseum by an underground passage, to allow easy access for the gladiators. The Ludus Magnus had its own miniature training arena, which was itself a popular attraction for Roman spectators. Other training schools were in the same area, including the Ludus Matutinus (Morning School), where fighters of animals were trained, plus the Dacian and Gallic Schools.

Also nearby were the Armamentarium, comprising an armory to store weapons; the Summum Choragium, where machinery was stored; the Sanitarium, which had facilities to treat wounded gladiators; and the Spoliarium, where bodies of dead gladiators were stripped of their armor and disposed of.

Around the perimeter of the Colosseum, at a distance of 18 m (59 ft) from the perimeter, was a series of tall stone posts, with five remaining on the eastern side. Various explanations have been advanced for their presence; they may have been a religious boundary, or an outer boundary for ticket checks, or an anchor for the velarium or awning.

Right next to the Colosseum is also the Arch of Constantine.

he Colosseum was used to host gladiatorial shows as well as a variety of other events. The shows, called munera, were always given by private individuals rather than the state. They had a strong religious element but were also demonstrations of power and family prestige, and were immensely popular with the population. Another popular type of show was the animal hunt, or venatio. This utilized a great variety of wild beasts, mainly imported from Africa and the Middle East, and included creatures such as rhinoceros, hippopotamuses, elephants, giraffes, aurochs, wisents, barbary lions, panthers, leopards, bears, caspian tigers, crocodiles and ostriches. Battles and hunts were often staged amid elaborate sets with movable trees and buildings. Such events were occasionally on a huge scale; Trajan is said to have celebrated his victories in Dacia in 107 with contests involving 11,000 animals and 10,000 gladiators over the course of 123 days.

During the early days of the Colosseum, ancient writers recorded that the building was used for naumachiae (more properly known as navalia proelia) or simulated sea battles. Accounts of the inaugural games held by Titus in AD 80 describe it being filled with water for a display of specially trained swimming horses and bulls. There is also an account of a re-enactment of a famous sea battle between the Corcyrean (Corfiot) Greeks and the Corinthians. This has been the subject of some debate among historians; although providing the water would not have been a problem, it is unclear how the arena could have been waterproofed, nor would there have been enough space in the arena for the warships to move around. It has been suggested that the reports either have the location wrong, or that the Colosseum originally featured a wide floodable channel down its central axis (which would later have been replaced by the hypogeum).[12]

Sylvae or recreations of natural scenes were also held in the arena. Painters, technicians and architects would construct a simulation of a forest with real trees and bushes planted in the arena's floor. Animals would be introduced to populate the scene for the delight of the crowd. Such scenes might be used simply to display a natural environment for the urban population, or could otherwise be used as the backdrop for hunts or dramas depicting episodes from mythology. They were also occasionally used for executions in which the hero of the story — played by a condemned person — was killed in one of various gruesome but mythologically authentic ways, such as being mauled by beasts or burned to death.

The Colosseum today is now a major tourist attraction in Rome with thousands of tourists each year paying to view the interior arena, though entrance for EU citizens is partially subsidised, and under-18 and over-65 EU citizens' entrances are free.[24] There is now a museum dedicated to Eros located in the upper floor of the outer wall of the building. Part of the arena floor has been re-floored. Beneath the Colosseum, a network of subterranean passageways once used to transport wild animals and gladiators to the arena opened to the public in summer 2010.[25]

The Colosseum is also the site of Roman Catholic ceremonies in the 20th and 21st centuries. For instance, Pope Benedict XVI leads the Stations of the Cross called the Scriptural Way of the Cross (which calls for more meditation) at the Colosseum[26][27] on Good Fridays.

In the Middle Ages, the Colosseum was clearly not regarded as a sacred site. Its use as a fortress and then a quarry demonstrates how little spiritual importance was attached to it, at a time when sites associated with martyrs were highly venerated. It was not included in the itineraries compiled for the use of pilgrims nor in works such as the 12th century Mirabilia Urbis Romae ("Marvels of the City of Rome"), which claims the Circus Flaminius — but not the Colosseum — as the site of martyrdoms. Part of the structure was inhabited by a Christian order, but apparently not for any particular religious reason.

It appears to have been only in the 16th and 17th centuries that the Colosseum came to be regarded as a Christian site. Pope Pius V (1566–1572) is said to have recommended that pilgrims gather sand from the arena of the Colosseum to serve as a relic, on the grounds that it was impregnated with the blood of martyrs. This seems to have been a minority view until it was popularised nearly a century later by Fioravante Martinelli, who listed the Colosseum at the head of a list of places sacred to the martyrs in his 1653 book Roma ex ethnica sacra.

Martinelli's book evidently had an effect on public opinion; in response to Cardinal Altieri's proposal some years later to turn the Colosseum into a bullring, Carlo Tomassi published a pamphlet in protest against what he regarded as an act of desecration. The ensuing controversy persuaded Pope Clement X to close the Colosseum's external arcades and declare it a sanctuary, though quarrying continued for some time.

At the instance of St. Leonard of Port Maurice, Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758) forbade the quarrying of the Colosseum and erected Stations of the Cross around the arena, which remained until February 1874. St. Benedict Joseph Labre spent the later years of his life within the walls of the Colosseum, living on alms, prior to his death in 1783. Several 19th century popes funded repair and restoration work on the Colosseum, and it still retains a Christian connection today. Crosses stand in several points around the arena and every Good Friday the Pope leads a Via Crucis procession to the amphitheatre.

 

Coliseu (Colosseo)

A seguir, um texto, em português, da Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre:

 

O Coliseu, também conhecido como Anfiteatro Flaviano, deve seu nome à expressão latina Colosseum (ou Coliseus, no latim tardio), devido à estátua colossal de Nero, que ficava perto a edificação. Localizado no centro de Roma, é uma excepção de entre os anfiteatros pelo seu volume e relevo arquitectónico. Originalmente capaz de albergar perto de 50 000 pessoas, e com 48 metros de altura, era usado para variados espetáculos. Foi construído a leste do fórum romano e demorou entre 8 a 10 anos a ser construído.

O Coliseu foi utilizado durante aproximadamente 500 anos, tendo sido o último registro efetuado no século VI da nossa era, bastante depois da queda de Roma em 476. O edifício deixou de ser usado para entretenimento no começo da era medieval, mas foi mais tarde usado como habitação, oficina, forte, pedreira, sede de ordens religiosas e templo cristão.

Embora esteja agora em ruínas devido a terremotos e pilhagens, o Coliseu sempre foi visto como símbolo do Império Romano, sendo um dos melhores exemplos da sua arquitectura. Actualmente é uma das maiores atrações turísticas em Roma e em 7 de julho de 2007 foi eleita umas das "Sete maravilhas do mundo moderno". Além disso, o Coliseu ainda tem ligações à igreja, com o Papa a liderar a procissão da Via Sacra até ao Coliseu todas as Sextas-feiras Santas.

O coliseu era um local onde seriam exibidos toda uma série de espectáculos, inseridos nos vários tipos de jogos realizados na urbe. Os combates entre gladiadores, chamados muneras, eram sempre pagos por pessoas individuais em busca de prestígio e poder em vez do estado. A arena (87,5 m por 55 m) possuía um piso de madeira, normalmente coberto de areia para absorver o sangue dos combates (certa vez foi colocada água na representação de uma batalha naval), sob o qual existia um nível subterrâneo com celas e jaulas que tinham acessos diretos para a arena; Alguns detalhes dessa construção, como a cobertura removível que poupava os espectadores do sol, são bastante interessantes, e mostram o refinamento atingido pelos construtores romanos. Formado por cinco anéis concêntricos de arcos e abóbadas, o Coliseu representa bem o avanço introduzido pelos romanos à engenharia de estruturas. Esses arcos são de concreto (de cimento natural) revestidos por alvenaria. Na verdade, a alvenaria era construída simultaneamente e já servia de forma para a concretagem. Outro tipo de espetáculos era a caça de animais, ou venatio, onde eram utilizados animais selvagens importados de África. Os animais mais utilizados eram os grandes felinos como leões, leopardos e panteras, mas animais como rinocerontes, hipopótamos, elefantes, girafas, crocodilos e avestruzes eram também utilizados. As caçadas, tal como as representações de batalhas famosas, eram efetuadas em elaborados cenários onde constavam árvores e edifícios amovíveis.

Estas últimas eram por vezes representadas numa escala gigante; Trajano celebrou a sua vitória em Dácia no ano 107 com concursos envolvendo 11 000 animais e 10 000 gladiadores no decorrer de 123 dias.

Segundo o documentário produzido pelo canal televisivo fechado, History Channel, o Coliseu também era utilizado para a realização de naumaquias, ou batalhas navais. O coliseu era inundado por dutos subterrâneos alimentados pelos aquedutos que traziam água de longe. Passada esta fase, foi construída uma estrutura, que é a que podemos ver hoje nas ruínas do Coliseu, com altura de um prédio de dois andares, onde no passado se concentravam os gladiadores, feras e todo o pessoal que organizava os duelos que ocorreriam na arena. A arena era como um grande palco, feito de madeira, e se chama arena, que em italiano significa areia, porque era jogada areia sob a estrutura de madeira para esconder as imperfeições. Os animais podiam ser inseridos nos duelos a qualquer momento por um esquema de elevadores que surgiam em alguns pontos da arena; o filme "Gladiador" retrata muito bem esta questão dos elevadores. Os estudiosos, há pouco tempo, descobriram uma rede de dutos inundados por baixo da arena do Coliseu. Acredita-se que o Coliseu foi construído onde, outrora, foi o lago do Palácio Dourado de Nero; O imperador Vespasiano escolheu o local da construção para que o mal causado por Nero fosse esquecido por uma construção gloriosa.

Sylvae, ou recreações de cenas naturais eram também realizadas no Coliseu. Pintores, técnicos e arquitectos construiriam simulações de florestas com árvores e arbustos reais plantados no chão da arena. Animais seriam então introduzidos para dar vida à simulação. Esses cenários podiam servir só para agrado do público ou como pano de fundo para caçadas ou dramas representando episódios da mitologia romana, tão autênticos quanto possível, ao ponto de pessoas condenadas fazerem o papel de heróis onde eram mortos de maneiras horríveis mas mitologicamente autênticas, como mutilados por animais ou queimados vivos.

Embora o Coliseu tenha funcionado até ao século VI da nossa Era, foram proibidos os jogos com mortes humanas desde 404, sendo apenas massacrados animais como elefantes, panteras ou leões.

O Coliseu era sobretudo um enorme instrumento de propaganda e difusão da filosofia de toda uma civilização, e tal como era já profetizado pelo monge e historiador inglês Beda na sua obra do século VII "De temporibus liber": "Enquanto o Coliseu se mantiver de pé, Roma permanecerá; quando o Coliseu ruir, Roma ruirá e quando Roma cair, o mundo cairá".

A construção do Coliseu foi iniciada por Vespasiano, nos anos 70 da nossa era. O edifício foi inaugurado por Tito, em 80, embora apenas tivesse sido finalizado poucos anos depois. Empresa colossal, este edifício, inicialmente, poderia sustentar no seu interior cerca de 50 000 espectadores, constando de três andares. Aquando do reinado de Alexandre Severo e Gordiano III, é ampliado com um quarto andar, podendo suster agora cerca de 90 000 espectadores. A grandiosidade deste monumento testemunha verdadeiramente o poder e esplendor de Roma na época dos Flávios.

Os jogos inaugurais do Coliseu tiveram lugar ano 80, sob o mandato de Tito, para celebrar a finalização da construção. Depois do curto reinado de Tito começar com vários meses de desastres, incluindo a erupção do Monte Vesúvio, um incêndio em Roma, e um surto de peste, o mesmo imperador inaugurou o edifício com uns jogos pródigos que duraram mais de cem dias, talvez para tentar apaziguar o público romano e os deuses. Nesses jogos de cem dias terão ocorrido combates de gladiadores, venationes (lutas de animais), execuções, batalhas navais, caçadas e outros divertimentos numa escala sem precedentes.

O Coliseu, como não se encontrava inserido numa zona de encosta, enterrado, tal como normalmente sucede com a generalidade dos teatros e anfiteatros romanos, possuía um “anel” artificial de rocha à sua volta, para garantir sustentação e, ao mesmo tempo, esta substrutura serve como ornamento ao edifício e como condicionador da entrada dos espectadores. Tal como foi referido anteriormente, possuía três pisos, sendo mais tarde adicionado um outro. É construído em mármore, pedra travertina, ladrilho e tufo (pedra calcária com grandes poros). A sua planta elíptica mede dois eixos que se estendem aproximadamente de 190 m por 155 m. A fachada compõe-se de arcadas decoradas com colunas dóricas, jónicas e coríntias, de acordo com o pavimento em que se encontravam. Esta subdivisão deve-se ao facto de ser uma construção essencialmente vertical, criando assim uma diversificação do espaço.

 

Os assentos eram em mármore e a cavea, escadaria ou arquibancada, dividia-se em três partes, correspondentes às diferentes classes sociais: o podium, para as classes altas; as maeniana, sector destinado à classe média; e os portici, ou pórticos, construídos em madeira, para a plebe e as mulheres. O pulvinar, a tribuna imperial, encontrava-se situada no podium e era balizada pelos assentos reservados aos senadores e magistrados. Rampas no interior do edifício facilitavam o acesso às várias zonas de onde podiam visualizar o espectáculo, sendo protegidos por uma barreira e por uma série de arqueiros posicionados numa passagem de madeira, para o caso de algum acidente. Por cima dos muros ainda são visíveis as mísulas, que sustentavam o velarium, enorme cobertura de lona destinada a proteger do sol os espectadores e, nos subterrâneos, ficavam as jaulas dos animais, bem como todas as celas e galerias necessárias aos serviços do anfiteatro.

O monumento permaneceu como sede principal dos espetáculos da urbe romana até ao período do imperador Honorius, no século V. Danificado por um terremoto no começo do mesmo século, foi alvo de uma extensiva restauração na época de Valentinianus III. Em meados do século XIII, a família Frangipani transformou-o em fortaleza e, ao longo dos séculos XV e XVI, foi por diversas vezes saqueado, perdendo grande parte dos materiais nobres com os quais tinha sido construído.

Os relatos romanos referem-se a cristãos sendo martirizados em locais de Roma descritos pouco pormenorizadamente (no anfiteatro, na arena...), quando Roma tinha numerosos anfiteatros e arenas. Apesar de muito provavelmente o Coliseu não ter sido utilizado para martírios, o Papa Bento XIV consagrou-o no século XVII à Paixão de Cristo e declarou-o lugar sagrado. Os trabalhos de consolidação e restauração parcial do monumento, já há muito em ruínas, foram feitos sobretudo pelos pontífices Gregório XVI e Pio IX, no século XIX.

Built by the Schiffswerks Rieherst company in Hamburg, the Umbria was launched on December 30th 1911 with the name of Bahia Blanca. It was a large freighter by that time, 150 meters long, with a power capable of providing a speed of 14 knots that could carry 9,000 tons of cargo and up to 2,000 passengers. In 1912 it began operating the Hamburg-America line doing different jobs between Europe and Argentina until the outbreak of World War I, when it was based in Buenos Aires. In 1918 the ship was acquired by the Argentinian government and it was not until 1935 when the ship was taken over by the Italian government and renamed again: the Umbria. From that moment its trips were to transport troops and during the following two years carried several thousand soldiers to the Italian colonies in East Africa.

  

The loss of the Umbria

 

In May 1940, when Italy was still neutral in World War II, the Umbria was secretly loaded with 360,000 bombs between 15 kg and 100 kg, 60 boxes of detonators, building materials and three Fiat Lunga cars, carrying a total 8,600 tons of weapons towards the East Africa. The explosives had destination Massawa and Assab, Eritrea, that was Italian colony by then, and the rest of the cargo was heading different locations in Asia. Italy's entry into the war was imminent and this shipment was destined to the defense of the colonies against the Allies and to the possible expansion of its African territories.

   

On 3rd June 1940 the Umbria reached Port Said, northern Egypt, where loaded with 1,000 tons of coal and water in a movement to fool the Allies, trying to look like a harmless freighter. The port, controlled by the Royal Navy, and its authorities allowed the ship enter on the Red Sea three days after arrival. The British delayed the departure of the Umbria knowing that Italy's entry into the war was imminent and that the cargo of Umbria had devastating power that sooner or later would be used against the Allies and why not, to get a great load to fight fascism. But Italy, as a neutral country that it was, had every right to transport weapons much like any other cargo to its colonies.

   

Having met the deadline to be retained, the Umbria crossed the Suez Canal on June 6th but with the escort of the HMS Grimsby. The importance and destructive capacity of the cargo required it. Three days later the Umbria entered in Sudan waters and the HMS Grimsby ordered the Umbria captain to anchor on Wingate Reef under the pretext of searching for contraband. Moments later the British warship HMS Leander arrived with a group of 20 sailors who boarded the Umbria. After thoroughly searching the ship and finding nothing, the captain ordered the British troops to remain the night aboard the Umbria.

The next morning Lorenzo Muiesan, Umbria captain, was in his cabin listening to the radio when Mussolini announced the entry of Italy into the World War II. Hostilities would begin at midnight of that day. Muiesan, a very patriotic captain with long experience, was the only one in the area who had heard the news and knew immediately that both Umbria and the burden would be used by the Allies against their own country. He had no option to disable both. In a move of extraordinary intelligence, as the hours passed retained by the British who did not yet know that Italy was officially the enemy, the captain ordered his crew conducting a rescue simulation... that was more real than the British thought. This maneuver, which the English soldiers agreed as they believed it would serve to further delay the departure of the Umbria. While the Italians occupied the lifeboats, the chief engineers, following Muiesan´s orders, opened all the valves and drown the ship to the bottom of the reef. With the crew safe, the British only had time to get on their ship and watch the freighter slid slowly.

When the captain of HMS Grimsby asked why he had done that Muiesan confirmed the declaration of war from Italy to Britain. The next day Muiesan and the rest of Umbria crew departed detainees to India, where they spent four years in prison.

  

CARGO:

The Umbria was carrying 360,000 individual aircraft bombs ranging in size from 15, 50 and 100 kg. The vessel also carried a large quantity of fuses, ammunition and detonators as well as other traditional cargo. The captain knew these bombs would be confiscated and used by the enemy against his country should they ever discover them which was why he made the call to sink the ship.

The Umbria had sailed in June 1940 with 6,000 tons of bombs, 60 boxes detonators, explosives, weapons and three Fiat 1100 Lunga from Genoa via Livorno and Naples in the Suez Canal and on the way via Massaua and Assab to Calcutta.

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.

 

As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.

 

The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.

 

The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.

 

Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).

 

However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.

 

Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.

 

The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.

 

The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.

As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.

 

Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.

 

With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position

15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot

Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)

Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;

plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)

1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)

Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks

Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)

Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)

Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

No internal guns.

4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,

plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)

AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.

 

However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.

 

The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.

 

Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.

On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.

The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.

 

Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.

 

The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.

  

Painting and markings:

No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.

 

Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).

The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).

The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.

 

After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).

 

The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.

  

The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.

DISCLAIMER

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

 

The Indian HAL HG-30 Bāja (‘Hawk’) had been designed and manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. in the early 60ies, when it became clear that the Indian Air Force was left without a capable and rather simple aircraft for these roles - the “jet age” had been in full development, but fast and large aircraft like the Su-7 or Hawker Hunter were just not suited for low-altitude missions against day and night visible ground targets in a broad area.

 

Indian military planners assumed that potential aggressor will first disable airfields, so the Bāja was designed to take-off from short unprepared runways, and it was readily available to be loaded with weapons and supplied through a flexible system of auxiliary airfields that required no special preparations, especially in mountainous regions.

 

The resulting HG-30 Bāja was a light, single-engine, low-wing single-seat aircraft with a metal airframe, capable of performing close air support, counter insurgency (COIN), and reconnaissance missions. The type featured a license-built Rolls Royce Dart turboprop engine and a reinforced, retractable tricycle landing gear for operations on rugged terrain. The unpressurized cockpit was placed as far forward and high as possible, offering the pilot an excellent view. The ejection seat was armored and the cockpit lined with nylon flak curtains.

The first HG-30 prototype flew in February 1962, and a total of 89 examples of the Bāja were built between 1963 and 1965, including two pre-production aircraft. These introduced some improvements like fixed wingtip tanks, a bulged canopy which improved the rear view or self-sealing and foam-filled fuselage tanks.

 

Armament consisted of four fixed 20mm cannons in the wings, plus unguided missiles, unguided bombs or napalm tanks under the wings and the fuselage on a total of 11 hardpoints. The inner pair under the wings as well as the centerline pylon were able to carry 1.000 lbs each and were ‘wet’ for optional drop tanks. The next pair could carry 500 lbs each, and the outer six attachment points were reserved for missile rails or single bombs of up to 200 lbs caliber. A total external ordnance load of up to 4.500 lbs could be carried, even though this was rarely practiced since it severely hampered handling.

 

The Bāja was exclusively used by the Indian Air Force, serving with 3rd (‘Cobras’) and 5th (‘Tuskers’) Squadrons in the Eastern and Western regions, alongside Toofani and Ajeet fighter bombers. Even though there was some foreign interest (e .g. from Israel and Yugoslavia,) no export sales came to fruition.

A tandem-seated trainer version was envisaged, but never left the drawing board, since Hindustan had already developed the HJT-16 Kiran jet trainer for the IAF which was more suitable, esp. with its side-by-side cockpit. Even a maritime version with foldable outer wings, arresting hook and structural reinforcements was considered for the Indian Navy.

 

The HG-30 did not make it in time into service for the five-week Indo-Pakistani war of 1965, but later saw serious action in the course of the Bangladesh Liberation War and the ensuing next clash between India and Pakistan in December 1971, when all aircraft (originally delivered in a natural metal finish) quickly received improvised camouflage schemes.

 

The 1971 campaign settled down to series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar and close-support attacks by fighters, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets, into which the HG-30s were heavily involved. Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against Pakistan's forward air bases in the West until the end of the war, and large scale interdiction and close-support operations were maintained.

The HG-30 excelled at close air support. Its straight wings allowed it to engage targets 150 MPH slower than swept-wing jet fighters. This slower speed improved shooting and bombing accuracy, enabling pilots to achieve an average accuracy of less than 40 feet, and the turboprop engine offered a much better fuel consumption than the jet engines of that era.

While it was not a fast aircraft and its pilots were a bit looked down upon by their jet pilot colleagues, the HG-30 was well liked by its crews because of its agility, stability at low speed, ease of service under field conditions and the crucial ability to absorb a lot of punishment with its rigid and simple structure.

 

After the 1971 conflict the Bāja served with the IAF without any further warfare duty until 1993, when, after the loss of about two dozen aircraft due to enemy fire and (only three) accidents, the type was completely retired and its COIN duties taken over by Mi-25 and Mi-35 helicopters, which had been gradually introduced into IAF service since 1984.

  

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 10.23 m (33 ft 6¼ in)

Wingspan: 12.38 m (40 ft 7¼ in) incl. wing tip tanks

Height: 3.95 m (12 ft 11¼ in)

Empty weight: 7,689 lb (3,488 kg)

Max. take-off weight: Loaded weight: 11,652 lb (5,285 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls Royce Dart RDa.7 turboprop engine, with 1.815 ehp (1.354 kW)/1.630 shp (1.220 kW) at 15,000 rpm

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 469 mph (755 km/h) at sea level and in clean configuration

Stall speed: 88 km/h (48 knots 55 mph)

Service ceiling: 34,000 ft (10,363 m)

Rate of climb: 5,020 ft/min (25.5 m/s)

Range: 1,385 miles (2,228 km) at max. take-off weight

 

Armament:

4× 20mm cannons (2 per wing) with 250 RPG

A total of 11 underwing and fuselage hardpoints with a capacity of 4.500 lbs (2.034 kg); provisions to carry combinations of general purpose or cluster bombs, machine gun pods, unguided missiles, air-to-ground rocket pods, fuel drop tanks, and napalm tanks.

     

The kit and its assembly

This fictional COIN aircraft came to be when I stumbled across the vintage Heller Breguet Alizé kit in 1:100 scale. I did some math and came to the conclusion that the kit would make a pretty plausible single-seat propeller aircraft in 1:72...

 

Finding a story and a potential user was more of a challenge. I finally settled on India – not only because the country had and has a potent aircraft industry, a COIN aircraft (apart from obsolete WWII types) would have matched well into the IAF in the early 70ies. Brazil was another manufacturer candidate – but then I had the vision of Indian Su-7 and their unique camouflage scheme, and this was what the kit was to evolve to! Muahahah!

 

What started as a simple adaptation idea turned into a true Frankenstein job, because only little was left from the Heller Alizé – the kit is SO crappy…

 

What was thrown into the mix:

• Fuselage, rudder and front wheel doors from the Heller Alizé

• Horizontal stabilizers from an Airfix P-51 Mustang

• Wings are the outer parts from an Airfix Fw 189, clipped and with new landing gear wells

• Landing gear comes from a Hobby Boss F-86, the main wheels from the scrap box

• Cockpit tub comes from a Heller Alpha Jet, seat and pilot from the scrap box

• The canopy comes from a Hobby Boss F4U Corsair

• Ordnance hardpoints were cut from styrene strips

• Propeller consists of a spinner from a Matchbox Mitsubishi Zero and blades from two AH-1 tail rotors

• Ordnance was puzzled together from the scrap box; the six retarder bombs appeared appropriate, the four missile pods were built from Matchbox parts. The wingtip tanks are streamlines 1.000 lbs bombs.

 

The only major sculpting work was done around the nose, in order to make the bigger propeller fiat and to simulate an appropriate air intake for the engine. Overall this thing looks pretty goofy, rather jet-like, with the slightly swept wings. On the other side, the Bāja does not look bad at all, and it has that “Small man’s A-10” aura to it.

 

Putting the parts together only posed two trouble zones: the canopy and the wings. The Corsair canopy would more or less fit, getting it in place and shaping the spine intersection was more demanding than expected. Still not perfect, but this was a “quick and dirty” project with a poor basis, anyway, so I don’t bother much.

Another tricky thing were the wings and getting them on the fuselage. That the Fw 189 wings ended up here has a reason: the original kit provided two pairs of upper wing halves, the lower halves were lacking! Here these obsolete parts finally found a good use, even though the resulting wing is pretty thick and called for some serious putty work on the belly side… Anyway, this was still easier than trying to modify the Alizé wings into something useful, and a thick wing ain’t bad for low altitude and bigger external loads.

  

Painting and markings

As mentioned before, the garish paint scheme is inspired by IAF Su-7 fighter bombers during/after the India-Pakistani confrontation of 1971. It’s almost surreal, reason enough to use it. Since a 1:72 Su-7 takes up so much shelf space I was happy to find this smaller aircraft as a suitable placebo.

 

I used Su-7 pictures as benchmarks, and settled for the following enamels as basic tones for the upper grey, brown and green:

• Humbrol 176 (Neutral Grey, out of production), for a dull and bluish medium grey

• Testors 1583 (Rubber), a very dark, reddish brown

• Humbrol 114 (Russian Green, out of production)

 

For the lower sides I used Testors 2123 (Russian Underside Blue). The kit received a black ink wash and some dry painting for weathering/more depth. Judging real life aircraft pics of IAF Su-7 and MiG-21, the original underside tone is hardly different from the upper blue grey and it seems on some aircraft as if the upper tone had been wrapped around. The aircraft do not appear very uniform at all, anyway.

 

Together with the bright IAF roundels the result looks a bit as if that thing had been designed by 6 year old, but the livery has its charm - the thing looks VERY unique! The roundels come from a generic TL Modellbau aftermarket sheet, the tactical codes are single white letters from the same manufacturer. Other stencils, warning signs and the squadron emblem come from the scrap box – Indian aircraft tend to look rather bleak and purposeful, except when wearing war game markings...

   

In the end, a small and quick project. The model was assembled in just two days, basic painting done on the third day and decals plus some weathering and detail work on the forth – including pics. A new record, even though this one was not built for perfectionism, rather as a recycling kit with lots of stock material at hand. But overall the Bāja looks exotic and somehow quite convincing?

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ 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 Saab 35 Draken ('The Kite' or 'The Dragon') was a Swedish fighter-interceptor developed and manufactured by Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget (SAAB) between 1955 and 1974. Development of the Saab 35 Draken started in 1948 as the Swedish air force future replacement for the then also in development Saab 29 Tunnan dayfighter and Saab 32B Lansen night fighter. It featured an innovative but unproven double delta wing, which led to the creation of a sub-scale test aircraft, the Saab 210, which was produced and flown to test this previously unexplored aerodynamic feature. The full-scale production version entered service with frontline squadrons of the Swedish Air Force on 8 March 1960. It received the designation Flygplan 35 (Fpl 35; 'Aeroplane 35') and was produced in several variants and types, most commonly as a fighter type with the prefix J (J 35), standing for Jaktflygplan (Pursuit-aircraft), the Swedish term for fighter aircraft.

 

The Saab 35 Draken was known for, among other things, its many "firsts" within aviation. It was the first Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the first fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe. Design-wise it was one of, if not the first, combat aircraft designed with double delta wings, being drawn up by early 1950. The unconventional wing design also had the side effect of making it the first known aircraft to perform and be capable of the Cobra maneuver. It was also one of the first Western-European-built aircraft to exceed Mach 2 in level flight, reaching it on 14 January 1960.

 

The Draken functioned as an effective supersonic fighter aircraft of the Cold War period. Even though the type was designed and intended as an interceptor, the Draken was considered to be a very capable dogfighter for the era, and its large wing area allowed the compact Saab 35 to carry a relatively high payload, too. In Swedish service, it underwent several upgrades, the ultimate of these being the J 35 J model which served until 1999. The Draken was also exported to several countries and remained operational in Austria until 2005.

 

In Swedish service, the Saab 35 was replaced by the Saab 37 “Viggen”. Development work on the new type was already initiated at Saab in 1952 and, following the selection of a radical canard delta wing configuration, the resulting aircraft performed its first flight on 8 February 1967 and entered service on 21 June 1971. However, being a radical and new design, the service introduction of the Viggen – esp. of its initial version, the AJ 37 fighter-bomber – was not without teething troubles, and in the late Sixties the Swedish Air Force expected an attack aircraft gap in its line-up. The former A 32 A Lansen attack aircraft were reaching the end of their airframe lifetime and were simply outdated, even though it was still needed as an anti-ship attack platform for the indigenous Rb 04 guided missile, so that Saab suggested an interim solution: the conversion of seventy of the 120 produced J 35 D fighters into dedicated attack aircraft, with the designation A 35 G (Gustav).

 

The Saab A 35 G was heavily modified to make it into a fighter bomber aircraft. Compared to the fighter versions the outer wings where completely redesigned and the aircraft featured 9 hardpoints in total. Airframe and landing gear were strengthened to cope with an increased payload of 10,000 lb (4,540 kg) vs. the fighters’ usual 6,393 lb (2,900 kg). Several airframe components were restored or replaced to extend the life of the aircraft, and the landing gear featured low-pressure tires for a better field performance on improvised/dispersed airfields.

A wide array of ordnance could be carried, such as bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber, MERs with up to six 100 kg (220 lb) bombs each, pods with unguided 75 mm or 135 mm rockets, single 14.5 cm psrak m49/56 high-explosive anti-tank rockets and, as a new weapon, the indigenous guided Rb 05 air-to-ground missile. This had been developed for the AJ 37 "Viggen in 1967 and was roughly comparable with the American AGM-12 Bullpup, but had some unique features. The Rb 05’s supersonic speed was deemed necessary to reduce the threat of surface-to-air missiles, and it allowed the missile to be deployed against slow/large aerial targets, too, making it a dual-purpose weapon. Consequently, the Rb 05’s fuze could be set by the pilot to impact mode for ground targets, or proximity mode for attacking air targets such as bombers.

The missile had a maximum range of 9 km (5.6 ml) and would usually be launched after a high-speed attack run on very low altitude and a climb to 400m for launch. Since the RB 05 was roll-stabilized, the aircraft did not need to be aimed straight at the target when launching and could immediately descend into terrain cover again, and this also made it possible to attack aerial targets from unusual angles and flight paths. Tracking the flares on the missile, the pilot would then visually guide the missile (the missile's engine was smokeless as to not obscure the view) with a small manual joystick towards the target. Guidance commands were transmitted to the missile via a jam-proof radio transmission link.

 

The A 35 G kept the J 35 D’s two 30 mm ADEN cannons, and a limited air defense capability was retained, too: the Gustav could carry up to four IR-guided Rb 24 (AIM-9B Sidewinder) AAMs, in addition to the Rb 05 in air-to-air mode. However, the aircraft lacked any air intercept radar, and had instead a Ferranti LRMTS (laser rangefinder and marked target seeker) and a counterweight installed in the nose, which resembled the S 35 E photo reconnaissance version’s nose, just without the windows for the side-looking cameras. For its attack role, the A 35 G received a new inertial navigation system, new altimeters and a ballistic computer from Saab called BT-9Rm, which worked with both bombs and rockets and even allowed for toss bombing. The Gustav Draken was furthermore fitted with electronic countermeasure (ECM) systems, a RHAWS and chaff and flare dispensers in their tail cones to improve its survivability over the battlefield.

 

The Gustav conversion program was accepted by the Swedish government in 1968. Work started in early 1969, the first revamped aircraft reached the operational units in late 1971. However, since production of the AJ 37 was starting at the same time, only 61 aircraft were eventually re-built from existing J 35 D airframes (one prototype and sixty production aircraft). Västgöta Wing (F 6) at Karlsborg was the first squadron to receive the A 35 G, replacing its A 32 A fighter bombers, the other unit to operate the type was Skaraborg Wing (F 7) at Såtenäs.

 

Among Sweden’s Draken fleet the Gustav was easy to recognize because it was the only version that carried the new “Fields & Meadows” splinter camouflage as standard livery. Service of the A 35 G lasted only until the early Eighties, though: as more and more AJ 37 all-weather fighter bombers reached the Swedish frontline units during the Seventies, the interim attack Draken, which was only effective under daylight and more or less good weather conditions, was withdrawn and either used for spares in the running J 35 J modernization program or directly scrapped, because many airframes had, suffering from the special stress of low-level flight operations, reached the end of their lifespan.

 

Another factor for the quick withdrawal was the disappointing performance of the type’s primary weapon, the Rb 05 missile: Its manual joystick steering in the cramped Draken cockpit (to be operated while the pilot was expected to fly at low altitude and evade enemy fire!) presented a number of problems, and the Rb 05’s ultimate accuracy was, even under ideal conditions, on the order of just 10 meters (33 ft), greater than desired. Targets like tanks or even ships were hard to hit with this level of scattering, combined with imminent danger for the pilot, and the air-to-air mode was even less effective. On the more modern Saab 37 the Rb 05 was therefore replaced by the Rb 75, a license-produced version of the American TV-guided AGM-65 Maverick “fire and forget” weapon. TV and laser seeker heads for the Rb 05 to improve the weapon’s accuracy and handling had been planned since the early Seventies, but were never realized.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 15.35 m (50 ft 4 in)

Wingspan: 9.42 m (30 ft 11 in)

Height: 3.89 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 49.2 m² (530 ft²)

Airfoil: 5%

Empty weight: 8,175 kg (18,006 lb)

Gross weight: 11,500 kg (25,330 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 13,554 kg (29,845 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6C (license-built Rolls Royce Avon with Swedish EBK67 afterburner)

turbojet engine, 56.5 kN (12,700 lbf) thrust dry, 77.3 kN (17,240 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 2,150 km/h (1,335 mph, 1,168 kn) at 11,000 m (36,089 ft), clean

1,430 km/h (888 mph, 777 kn) w. two dop tanks and two 454 kg (1.00 lb) bombs

Range: 1.120 km (605 nmi; 696 mi); clean, internal fuel only

Ferry range: 2,750 km (1,480 nmi; 1,710 mi) with four external 500 l drop tanks

Service ceiling: 20,000 m (66,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 199 m/s (39,200 ft/min)

Wing loading: 231.6 kg/m² (47.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.7

Takeoff roll: 800 m (2,625 ft)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm akan m/55 ADEN cannon with 100 rounds per gun

9× hardpoints with a total capacity of 4,500 kg (10.000 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

Even though the model depicts a what-if aircraft, the Draken’s proposed “Gustav” attack variant based on the J 35 D interceptor was real – even though I could not find much detail information about it. So, I took some inspiration from the contemporary Danish Saab 35XD export version, which probably had similar features to the Gustav? Another inspiring factor was a pair of Rb 05 missiles (from an Airfix Viggen) that I had bought with a spare parts lot some time ago – and an attack Draken would be the perfect carrier for these exotic (and unsuccessful) missiles.

 

For a low-budget build I used one of Mistercraft’s many recent re-boxings of the vintage Revell Draken from 1957(!), and this kit is nothing for those who are faint at heart. It is horrible.

The kit probably depicts a late J 35 A (already with a long tail section), but even for this variant it lacks details like the air scoops for the afterburner or a proper landing gear. The Draken’s characteristic tail wheel is also missing completely. Worst pitfall, however: there is NO interior at all, not even a lumpy seat! The canopy, the early model with struts, is disturbingly clean and crisp, though. The overall fit is mediocre at best, too – there are only a few visible seams, but any of them calls for filling and PSR. It’s a very toyish kit, even though the general outlines are O.K.

And the Mistercraft instructions are really audacious: they show all the parts that are actually NOT there at all. Suddenly a seat appears in the cockpit, a fin fairing from a J 35 D or later, or the tail wheel… And the decal sheets only roughly meet the aircraft you see in the painting instructions - there are three sheets, totally puzzled together, including material for aircraft not mentioned in the instructions, but that’s a common feature of most Mistercraft kits. But: how much can you taunt your disappointed customers?

 

So, this leaves lots of room for improvements, and calls for a lot of scratching and improvisation, too. First measure was to open both the air intakes (which end after 2mm in vertical walls) and the exhaust, which received an afterburner dummy deep inside to create depth. Next, I implanted a complete cockpit, consisting of s scratched dashboard (styrene sheet), the tub from an Italeri Bae Hawk trainer’s rear cockpit (which comes with neat side consoles and fits quite well) plus a shallow vintage ejection seat, probably left over from an early MiG from a KP kit or one of its many later reincarnations. As an alternative, there’s a Quickboost resin aftermarket set with a complete cockpit interior (even including side walls, IIRC intended to be used with the Hasegawa Draken) available but using it on this crappy kit would have been a waste of resources – it’s more expensive than the kit itself, and even with a fine cockpit the exterior would still remain sh!t.

 

Since I could not find any detail about the Gustav Draken’s equipment I gave it a laser rangefinder in a poor-fitting S 35 E (or is it a Danish export F-35?) nose that comes as an optional part with the vintage Revell mold – which is weird, because the recce Draken was built between 1963 and 1968 in 2 series, several years after the kit’s launch? Maybe the Mistercraft kit is based on the 1989 Revell re-boxing? But that kit also features an all-in-one pilot/seat part and a two-piece canopy… Weird!

 

Once the hull was closed many surface details had to be added. The afterburner air scoops were created from plastic profiles, which are aftermarket roof rails in H0 scale. Styrene profile material was also used to create the intakes behind the cockpit, better than nothing. The OOB pitot on the fin was very robust, and since it would be wrong on a J 35 D I cut it off and added a fairing to the fin tip, a shortened/modified ACMI pod, which bears a better pitot alternative at its tip. The pitot on the nose was scratched from heated styrene, since the kit offers no part at all.

 

Under the rear fuselage the whole tail wheel arrangement had to be scratched. The shallow fairing consists of a section from a Matchbox EA-6B drop tank, the wheel and its strut were tinkered together with bits from the scrap box and profile material. Not stellar, but better than OOB (= nothing!).

The landing gear struts were taken from the kit but beefed up with some details. The main wheels had to be replaced, the new ones come from a KP MiG-21, IIRC.

 

The ordnance consists of a pair of Rb 05’s from an Airfix Viggen, a pair of OOB drop tanks and MERs from a Matchbox A-7D, together with fourteen streamlined bombs from the same kit – twelve on the MERs and single bombs on the outer pylons. AFAIK, Sweden never used MERs on their aircraft, but the bombs come pretty close to some small bombs that I have seen as AJ 37 ordnance. Most pylons are OOB, I just added a single ventral station and two outer hardpoints under the wings. The Rb 05s received a prominent place under the air intakes on Sidewinder launch rails.

  

Painting and markings:

Finally a good excuse to apply the famous and complex “Fields & Meadows” paint scheme to a Draken model! However, this “combo” actually existed in real life, but only on a single aircraft: around 1980 a J 35 B (s/n 35520), aircraft “20” of F18, was painted in this fashion, but AFAIK it was only an instructional airframe. You find some pictures of this aircraft online but getting a clear three-side view (esp. from above!) as a reliable painting benchmark is impossible. However, a complete paint scheme of this aircraft is provided with one of Mistercraft’s Revell Draken re-boxings (not the one I bought, though), even though it is mismarked as a J 35 F of F10 in the instructions. One of the common Mistercraft errors, err, “surprises” (*sigh*).

 

Finding suitable model paints for the elaborate scheme is not easy, either, and after having applied it several times I stuck to my favorites: Humbrol 150 (Forest Green, FS 34127), 75 (Bronze Green), 118 (US Light Tan, FS 30219, a bit light but RAF Dark Earth is too somber) and Revell 06 (Tar Black, RAL 9021) on the upper surfaces and Humbrol 247 (RLM76) underneath.

A large ventral section was, typical for the J 35, left in bare metal, since leaking fuel and oil would frequently eat away any paint there. The section was painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with Matt Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol). As per usual, the model received an overall light black ink washing and some post-shading in order to emphasize the panels, correct the splinter camouflage and dramatize the surface. Some extra weathering was done around the gun ports and the jet nozzle with graphite.

 

Internal details like the cockpit and the landing gear were painted with the help of Swedish Saab 35 reference pictures. The cockpit tub was painted in a dark, bluish green (Humbrol 76) with grey-green (Revell 67) side walls.

The landing gear and its respective wells were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57), parts of the struts were painted in a bright turquoise (a mix of Humbrol 89 and 80; looks quite weird, but I like such details!). The wheel hubs became medium grey (Revell 47). The Rb 05 missiles were painted in white as live weapons, so that they stand out well from the airframe. The drop tanks received the same blue-grey as the underside (Humbrol 247). MERs and launch rails were painted in a neutral grey (RAL 7001) and the bombs became olive drab (RAL 6014, Gelboliv) with yellow rings and golden fuzes.

 

Decals/markings were puzzled together from a Moose Republic Saab 32 sheet (unit code number and emblem) and the spares box, including the red tactical tail code from an Italeri 1:72 Gripen and roundels from a Hasegawa Draken. Stencils were taken from the kit’s OOB sheet and also from the Hasegawa Draken sheet. Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

What a horror trip! The paint scheme itself was/is challenging enough, but modding the crappy vintage Revell kit into something more presentable was already a fight in itself. However, I like the outcome. “Fields & Meadows” suits the Draken with its huge and flat upper surface well, and while the Gustav conversion did not take much effort the “mud mover” ordnance under this Mach 2 fighter really looks strange and makes you wonder what this is. A nice what-if model, despite its blurriness!

Monteagle TN

Airmen assigned to the 114th Civil Engineer Squadron practice shoot, move, communicate drills during October's Unit Training Assembly as part of the Multi-Capable Airman (MCA) concept. The training consisted of convoy operations, movement techniques with weapons, integrated base defense and land navigation as a way to cultivate a more self-sustaining squadron. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Staff Sgt. Jorrie Hart)

Until today I had not noticed the Brassier 7 restaurant had ceased trading but I was not surprised because I have always believed that location was not capable of supporting a 250 seater restaurant that was not within the price range of people living, working or studying in the area. Also, for various reasons. there was no way that it could attract people from elsewhere in the city.

  

I cannot remember exactly when but a number of years ago the celebrity chef Gary Rhodes opened his restaurant, Rhodes D7, on Capel Street in Dublin. I could not believe his choice of location and I often wondered if he had in fact every visited the restaurant or the location. I must admit that I have never understand the concept of paying extra to eat at a restaurant featuring the name of a famous chef that never cooks the food.

 

When it was first established my mother indicated that she would like to try it but when I phoned I was informed that it was booked out for at least four weeks. However, every time I passed by it was at best about 25% occupied. I tried a few more times but still there was a three to four week waiting list and and at one stage it was as high as six weeks despite the fact the place was less full every time I walked by. My mother never got to have a meal there.

 

Sometimes they would open on bank holidays and sometimes, at random, they were closed on Bank Holidays and Sundays [that is usually a bad sign]. One bank holiday I was passing by and as they were open I dropped in and got a table no problem and the food was good but expensive compared to other options nearby.

 

I think that it was Christmas 2008 and I had been invited to visit my brother for Christmas. On the 23rd. I visited the restaurant late in the evening and as I was the last customer to leave I got to have a chat with the head waiter who mentioned that he was going back to Poland the next morning for a two week holiday as the restaurant would be closed for two weeks. I asked him why would a restaurant close for two weeks at the busiest time of the year but he did not appear to think that it was odd but I certainly did.

 

The next day my trip to my brother’s house had to be cancelled because all the family were ill so I was stuck in Dublin for Christmas. On the 24th. I walked by the restaurant and it had a sign in the window indicating the the restaurant was closed for renovation until 17th. March [St. Patrick’s Day] and for many reasons that was an obvious lie.

 

The restaurant remained empty for a long time. Ta Brasserie 7 Limited was set up on Tuesday the 17th of April 2012. When it did reopen as Brasserie 7 I was the first customer and I got a excellent meal free of charge. Here is what I said back then “Saturday 8th. December 2012: [Update: I visited this restaurant today and I was their first customer. They have no connection with the previous operation which ceased trading at the end of 2008. The food was excellent as was the service]”.

 

I only visited twice during the following years because I considered it to be too expensive for what was on offer. It is possible that the prices dropped but I had lost interest.

  

In case you are interested here is an extract from the press release back in 2008:

 

“Welcome to rhodesD7, Gary Rhodes' first Irish restaurant venture. Situated in Dublin 7, our 250-cover venue offers Gary's unique style of European cuisine for which he has won 5 Michelin Stars. We offer a wide selection of dishes, each unique and flavoursome with Gary's distinctive touch. With a mezzanine floor and heated outdoor eating area, rhodesD7 offers a choice of fabulous dining areas. Situated on the ground floor of the landmark Capel Building, our modern, vibrant interior contains commissioned works of art by renowned Irish artist Deborah Donnelly.”

The American MGR-1 Honest John Rocket was the first Nuclear-Capable Surface-to-Surface Rocket in their arsenal, it was originally designated ''Artillery Rocket XM31'' the first unit was tested on 29th June 1951, with the first production rounds delivered in January 1953. Its designation was changed to ''M31'' in September 1953. The first Army Units received their Rockets by year's end and Honest John Battalions were deployed in Europe in early 1954. Alternatively, the Rocket was capable of carrying an ordinary High-Explosive Warhead weighing 1,500lb.

 

Developed at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, the Honest John was a large but simple fin-stabilised, unguided Artillery Rocket weighing 5,820lb in its initial M31 Nuclear-Armed version. Mounted on the back of a truck, the Rocket was aimed in much the same way as a Cannon and then fired up an elevated ramp, igniting four small spin rockets as it cleared the end of the ramp. The M31 had a range of 15.4 miles with a 20 kiloton Nuclear Warhead and was also capable of carrying a 1,500lb Conventional Warhead.

 

The M31 system included a truck-mounted, unguided, Solid-Fueled Rocket transported in three separate parts, the Honest John was assembled in the field before launch, mounted on an M289 Launcher, and aimed and fired in about 5 minutes. The Rocket was originally outfitted with a W7 Nuclear Warhead, with a variable yield of up to 20 kilotons of TNT in 1959, a W31 Warhead with three variants was deployed with yields of 2, 10 or 30 Kilotons. There was a W31 variant of 20 Kilotons used exclusively for the Nike Hercules Anti-Aircraft System. The M31 had a range between 3.4 and 15.4 miles.

 

Early tests exhibited more scatter on target than was acceptable when carrying conventional payloads. Development of an upgraded Honest John, M50, was undertaken to improve accuracy and extend range. The size of the fins was greatly reduced to eliminate weathercocking. Increased spin was applied to restore the positive stability margin that was lost when fin size was reduced. The improved M50, with the smaller fins and more ''rifiling'' had a maximum range of 30+ miles with a scatter on target of only 250 yards, demonstrating an accuracy approaching that of Tube Artillery. The Honest John was manufactured by the Douglas Aircraft Company of Santa Monica, California.

 

In the 1960's, Sarin Nerve Gas Cluster Munitions were also available, designed to be interchangeable for use with either the Honest John or MGM-5 Corporal. Initially the M79 (E19R1) GB Cluster Warhead, containing 356 M134 (E130R1) Bomblets for the M31A1C Honest John. The production model was the M190 (E19R2) GB Cluster Warhead, containing 356 M139 (E130R2) Bomblets when the M31A1C was phased out in favor of the XM50 Honest John. Under nominal conditions it had an mean area of effect of 0.347 square miles.

  

The two basic versions of Honest John were:-

 

**MGR-1A (M31) was 27ft 3in long, had an engine diameter of 22+7⁄8 in, a Warhead diameter of 30in, a fin span of 9ft 1in, weighed 5,820lb (nuclear) and had a range of 3.4 to 15.4 miles. The Hercules Powder Company M6 Solid-Fueled Rocket motor was 16ft 5+7⁄16 in long, weighed 3,937lb, and had 99,000 lbf thrust.

 

**MGR-1B (M50) was 26ft long, had an engine diameter of 22.8in, a Warhead diameter of 30in, a fin span of 4ft 6in, weighed 4,320lb (nuclear) and had a maximum range of 30 miles, practically twice that of the M31. An improved propellant formulation gave the Rocket motor 150,000 lbf thrust.

 

In late 1950, Major General Holger Toftoy was a Colonel overseeing the development of the Rocket. The project was in danger of cancellation "on the grounds that such a large Unguided Rocket could not possibly have had the accuracy to justify further funds." On a trip to the White Sands Missile Range, Toftoy met a Texan man who was prone to making unbelievable statements. Whenever anyone expressed doubt about the man's claims, he would respond, "Why, around these parts, I'm called ''Honest John !'" Because the project was being questioned, Toftoy felt that the nickname was appropriate for the Rocket and suggested the name to his superiors.

 

Specifications:-

 

▪︎Type: Nuclear-Capable Surface-to-Surface Rocket

▪︎Place of Origin: United States

▪︎In Service: 1953 to 1991

▪︎Used By: Belgium / Canada / Denmark / France / Germany / Greece / Italy / Netherlands / Norway / South Korea / Taiwan / Turkey / United Kingdom / United States

▪︎Conflicts: Cold War

▪︎Manufacturer: Douglas Aircraft Company

▪︎Number Built: 7000+

▪︎Variants: MGR-1A / MGR-1B / MGR-1C

▪︎Mass: MGR-1A - 5,820lb / Length: 27ft 3in / Diameter: 30in

▪︎Powerplant: Hercules M6 solid-fueled rocket, 99,000 lbf

▪︎Wingspan: 9ft 1in

▪︎Propellant: Double base solid propellant

▪︎Operational Range: 3.4 to 15.4 miles

▪︎Flight Ceiling: 30,000ft

▪︎Maximum Speed: Mach 2.3.

 

Extracts taken from Wikipedia en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGR-1_Honest_John

After Adolf Hitler took power in Germany in 1933, the nation’s secret rearmament after World War I could come out into the open. The Luftwaffe quickly announced a competition for a single-seat point defense interceptor, able to reach 250 mph at 20,000 feet, be capable of reaching 15,000 feet in 17 minutes or less, and have heavy cannon armament. Production aircraft would need to use either the Junkers Jumo 210 or Daimler-Benz 600 series inline piston engines.

 

Arado, Heinkel, and the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke, headed by its chief designer Willy Messerschmitt, all submitted entries. The Ar 80 was rejected, but both Heinkel’s He 112 and BFW’s Bf 109 were highly competitive. To ensure he had enough aircraft for the competition, Messerschmitt’s first Bf 109V1s were equipped with borrowed Rolls-Royce Kestrel engines. During the competition, it looked as if the He 112 would win it: the Bf 109 was disliked by test pilots because of poor visibility forward on the ground, unreliable narrow-track landing gear, sideways-closing canopy, and heaviness on the controls. However, the Bf 109 was lighter and cheaper than the He 112, and it had better maneuverability, thanks to the then novel inclusion of leading-edge slats; it was also faster. The Reich Air Ministry chose the Bf 109, noting that Messerschmitt needed to put it in full production as soon as possible: the British were testing a similar high-performance fighter, the Supermarine Spitfire.

 

Initially, production Bf 109s (from the A through D variants) used the less powerful Jumo engine. These aircraft provided valuable experience in the type, however: several Bf 109Ds were deployed with the German “volunteer” Condor Legion during the Spanish Civil War, where it proved to be superior to anything in either the Spanish Republican or Nationalist air forces. By the beginning of World War II in September 1939, however, the majority of German fighter units had been equipped with the Daimler-Benz DB 601 powered Bf 109E, which was an even better aircraft with plenty of power. “Emils” obliterated the obsolescent air forces of Poland, Norway, and the Low Countries, and did well against more contemporary aircraft such as the Hawker Hurricane and Dewoltine D.520 over France. Only against the Spitfire, which the Bf 109 met for the first time during the Dunkirk evacuation, did it meet its match.

 

This was to continue during the Battle of Britain. German pilots such as Werner Molders and Adolf Galland learned that the Spitfire could turn inside the Bf 109, but that their fighter was better in the vertical; the only limit to the Bf 109’s performance was its lack of range, which limited it to 15 minutes combat time over England—the 109 simply was never designed as an escort fighter. Pilots liked the stable gun platform of the Bf 109, which concentrated its main armament in the nose, consisting of two machine guns in the cowl and a single cannon firing through the propeller hub.

 

Messerschmitt listened to Battle of Britain veterans and produced the Bf 109F, which was more aerodynamically clean, as it eliminated tailplane bracing and the wing cannon, which had been added before the Battle of France but impacted the 109’s manueverability. The “Fritz” was the equal of the Spitfire and superior to the P-40 Warhawk, which it began to fight in North Africa in early 1941, and far and away better than anything the Soviet Air Force could field when Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941. German veteran pilots began to rack up incredible kill ratios, with Molders and Galland topping the 100 mark in early 1941; Hans-Joachim Marseille would clear the 150 kill mark by 1942.

 

Yet the situation in Europe changed, and changed too rapidly for Messerschmitt to truly react. By 1943, when the Bf 109G was introduced, the tide was beginning to turn; by 1944, when 109 production hit its peak, the fighter was clearly outclassed by newer Allied fighters. The Bf 109 was not as manueverable as the P-51 Mustang and was outlcassed above 15,000 feet by the P-47 Thunderbolt; on the Eastern Front, the Russians began fielding the powerful Lavochkin La-5 and the nimble Yakovlev Yak-3. German pilot quality kept the Bf 109 very competitive in the East, where several Luftwaffe pilots now surpassed the 200 victory mark, but in the West, where Allied pilots were every bit as good as their German counterparts, attrition began to set in. German pilot training could not keep up with losses, and German pilot quality began to degrade; worse, the Bf 109 simply could not be improved any further.

 

By 1944, the 109 was obsolete and hunted down by American fighters ranging all over the shrinking Reich: even the best pilot could do little when he was attacked the moment he took off by P-51s superior to his aircraft and in far greater numbers. The “Gustav” had introduced the more powerful DB 605 engine, which had needed so many adaptations and cooling vents that the Bf 109G was referred to by pilots as the “pickle”: the Bf 109K returned to a more aerodynamic finish, but the “Kara” was obsolete before it entered service. Luftwaffe pilots and RLM officials had wanted Messerschmitt to end Bf 109 production in favor of the jet-powered Me 262, but this was not practical due to the lack of jet engines; Willy Messerschmitt himself also distrusted the new technology and kept the 109 in production far longer than it should have been. Whatever the case, the Bf 109 was still in production when its factories were destroyed or overrun in 1945.

 

Despite its shortcomings—more 109s were destroyed in landing accidents on the Eastern Front than by Russian fighters—it had proven a deadly opponent. Over a hundred Luftwaffe pilots scored more than a hundred kills in the aircraft; a few, such as Molders, Galland, and Marseille had done so against Allied pilots their equal in skill and training. On the Eastern Front, the numbers became truly ridiculous: between the two of them, Gerhard Barkhorn and Erich Hartmann destroyed 653 Soviet aircraft alone. Kill ratios against the Soviets were as high as 25 to 1. Bf 109s were also flown by the top ace of Finland, Ilmari Juutilainen, and Romania, Alexandru Serbanescu; it was also briefly flown by Italy’s top ace, Adriano Visconti.

 

After the end of World War II, most surviving Bf 109s were scrapped by the victorious Allies, but it remained in limited production in Czechslovakia, as the Avia S.199, and in Spain, as the Hispano HA-1112 Buchon. Due to a lack of Daimler-Benz engines, the S.199 was equipped with later model Jumo engines, which impacted their performance, leading Czech pilots to call them “Mules.” Ironically, they would be supplied to the nascent Israeli Air Force as the Sherut Avir’s first operational fighter, where they were used effectively. Buchons, refitted with Rolls-Royce Merlin engines, those used by the Bf 109’s principal foes, would stay in Spanish service until 1967. 33,984 Bf 109s were produced during World War II, making it the most widely produced fighter in history. Today, only 70 remain, with a mere seven original or restored examples airworthy.

 

This Bf 109E-3 at the Museum of Flight in Seattle, Washington was originally built as a Bf 109 in Germany, supplied to Spain before the end of the war, then rebuilt as a Rolls-Royce Merlin Hispano HA.1112. It was bought by warbird collector Douglas Champlin in 1972 and rebuilt again, back to more or less Bf 109E standard, though it uses a later Daimler-Benz engine, as the originals were unavailable by that time. Like the rest of Champlin's collection, it went to the Museum of Flight around 2006. Today, it is displayed as Hans "Assi" Hahn's Bf 109E-3, as it appeared during the Battle of Britain. Hahn, who finished the war with 108 kills (58 of them Spitfires), flew with JG 2 ("Richthofen"); the yellow cowling and tail stripe were for recognition purposes, but it led to several Luftwaffe units being nicknamed "Yellow-Nosed Bastards" or the "Boys from Abbeville" from their base in France.

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.

 

As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.

 

The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.

 

The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.

 

Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).

 

However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.

 

Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.

 

The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.

 

The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.

As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.

 

Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.

 

With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position

15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot

Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)

Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;

plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)

1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)

Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks

Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)

Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)

Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

No internal guns.

4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,

plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)

AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.

 

However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.

 

The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.

 

Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.

On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.

The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.

 

Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.

 

The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.

  

Painting and markings:

No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.

 

Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).

The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).

The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.

 

After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).

 

The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.

  

The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ 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 North American FJ-4 Fury was a swept-wing carrier-capable fighter-bomber, originally developed for the United States Navy and Marine Corps. It was the final development in a lineage that included the Air Force's F-86 Sabre. The FJ-4 shared its general layout and engine with the earlier FJ-3, but featured an entirely new wing design. And it was, as a kind of final embodiment with the FJ-4B, a very different aircraft from the F-86 .

 

The first FJ-4 flew on 28 October 1954 and delivery began in February 1955. Of the original order for 221 FJ-4 fighters, the last 71 were modified into the FJ-4B fighter-bomber version, of which the Netherlands received 16 aircraft under the designation FJ-4B from the USA in the course of NATO support. Even though the main roles of the MLD were maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare and search and rescue, the FJ-4B was a dedicated fighter-bomber, and these aircraft were to be used with the Dutch Navy’s Colossus-Class carrier HNLMS Karel Doorman (R81).

 

Compared to the lighter FJ-4 interceptor, the FJ-4B had a stronger wing with six instead of four underwing stations, a stronger landing gear and additional aerodynamic brakes under the aft fuselage. The latter made landing safer by allowing pilots to use higher thrust settings, and were also useful for dive attacks. Compared to the FJ-4, external load was doubled, and the US FJ-4Bs were capable of carrying a nuclear weapon on the inboard port station, a feature the MLD Furies lacked. The MLD aircraft were still equipped with the corresponding LABS or Low-Altitude Bombing System for accurate delivery of ordnance.

The Dutch Furies were primarily intended for anti-ship missions (toting up to five of the newly developed ASM-N-7 missiles - renamed in AGM-12B Bullpup after 1962 - plus a guidance pod) and CAS duties against coastal targets, as well as for precision strikes. In a secondary role, the FJ-4B could carry Sidewinder AAMs for interception purposes.

 

The MLD's FJ-4B became operational in 1956, just in time to enhance the firepower of the Karel Doorman, which just had its 24 WW-II era propeller driven Fairey Firefly strike fighters and Hawker Sea Fury fighter/anti-ship aircraft backed up with 14 TBF Avenger ASW/torpedo bombers and 10 Hawker Sea Hawk fighters (the MLD owned 22 of these) for an ASW/Strike profile. The Furies joined the carrier in late 1957 and replaced the piston-engined attack aircraft.

 

In 1960, during the Dutch decolonization and planned independence of Western New Guinea, a territory which was also claimed by Indonesia, the Karel Doorman set sail along with two destroyers and a modified oil tanker to 'show the flag'. In order to avoid possible problems with Indonesia's ally Egypt at the Suez Canal, the carrier instead sailed around the horn of Africa. She arrived in Fremantle, Australia, where the local seamen's union struck in sympathy with Indonesia; the crew used the propeller thrust of aircraft chained down on deck to nudge the carrier into dock without tugs! In addition to her air wing, she was ferrying twelve Hawker Hunter fighters to bolster the local Dutch defense forces, which the Karel Doorman delivered when she arrived at Hollandia, New Guinea.

 

During the 1960 crisis, Indonesia prepared for a military action named Operation Trikora (in the Indonesian language, "Tri Komando Rakyat" means "The Three Commands of the People"). In addition to planning for an invasion, the TNI-AU (Indonesian Air Forces) hoped to sink the Karel Doorman with Soviet-supplied Tupolev Tu-16KS-1 Badger naval bombers using AS-1 Kennel/KS-1 Kometa anti-ship missiles. This bomber-launched missile strike mission was cancelled on short notice, though, because of the implementation of the cease-fire between Indonesia and the Netherlands. This led to a Dutch withdrawal and temporary UN peacekeeping administration, followed by occupation and annexation through Indonesia. While the Dutch aircraft served actively during this conflict, flying patrols and demonstrating presence, visibly armed and in alert condition, no 'hot' sortie or casualty occured, even though one aircraft, 10-18, was lost in a start accident. The pilot ejected safely.

 

The MLD FJ-4Bs only served on the carrier until its overhaul in 1964, after which the carrier-borne attack role was eliminated and all aircraft were transferred to land bases (Valkenburg) or in reserve storage. The Seahawks were retired from service by the end of the 1960s after the sale of the Karel Doorman to Argentina, and the FJ-4Bs were returned to the United States, where they were re-integrated into the USMC until the end of the 1960ies, when all FJ-4 aircraft were phased out.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 36 ft 4 in (11.1 m)

Wingspan: 39 ft 1 in (11.9 m)

Height: 13 ft 11 in (4.2 m)

Wing area: 338.66 ft² (31.46 m²)

Empty weight: 13,210 lb (6,000 kg)

Loaded weight: 20,130 lb (9,200 kg)

Max. take-off weight: 23,700 lb (10,750 kg)

Powerplant: 1 × Wright J65-W-16A turbojet, 7,700 lbf (34 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 680 mph (1,090 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,670 m)

Range: 2,020 mi (3,250 km) with 2× 200 gal (760 l) drop tanks and 2× AIM-9 missiles

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 7,660 ft/min (38.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 69.9 lb/ft² (341.7 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: .325

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (0.787 in) cannon

6× pylons under the wings for 3,000 lb (1,400 kg) external ordnance, including up to 6× AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs, bombs and guided/unguided ASM, e .g. ASM-N-7 (AGM-12B Bullpup) missiles.

  

The kit and its assembly

Originally, this model project was inspired by a (whiffy) Dutch F3H Demon profile, designed by fellow user Darth Panda at whatifmodelers.com. I found the idea of a foreign/NATO user of one of these early carrier-borne jet fighters very inspiring – not only because of the strange design of many of these aircraft, but also since the USN and USMC had been the only real world users of many of these types.

 

Initially, I planned to convert a F3H accordingly. But with limited storage/display space at home I decided to apply the MLD idea to another smaller, but maybe even more exotic, type: the North American FJ-4B Fury, which was in 1962 recoded into AF-1E.

I like the beefy Sabre cousin very much. It’s one of those aircraft that received little attention, even from model kit manufacturers. In fact, in 1:72 scale there are only vintage vacu kits or the very basic Emhar kit available. Th Emhar kit, which I used here and which is a kind donation of a fellow modeler (Thanks a lot, André!), a rather rough thing with raised panel lines and much room for improvements. As a side note, there's also a FJ-4B from Revell, but it's just a 1996 re-issue with no improvements, whatsoever.

 

Another facet of the model: When I did legwork concerning a possible background story, I was surprised to find out that the Netherlands actually operated aircraft carriers in the 1950s, including carrier-borne, fixed-wing aircraft, even jets in the form of Hawker Sea Hawks. The real life FJ-4Bs service introduction, the naissance of NATO and the Indonesian conflict as well as the corresponding intervention of the Karel Doorman carrier all fell into a very plausible time frame – and so there’s a very good and plausible story why the MLD could actually have used the Fury fighter bomber!

 

The Emhar kit was not modified structurally, but saw some changes in detail. These include a scratch-built cockpit with side walls, side consoles and a new ejection seat, plus a Matchbox pilot figure, a new front wheel (from a Kangnam Yak-38, I believe), plus a lot of added blade aerials and a finer pitot.

The flaps were lowered, for a more lively look- Another new feature is the opened air intake, which features a central splitter - in fact a vertically placed piece of a Vicker Wellesley bomb container from Matchbox. At the rear end, the exhaust pipe was opened and lengthened internally.

 

The six weapon hardpoints were taken from the original kit, but I did not use the four Sidewinder AAMs and the rather bulky drop tanks. So, all ordnance is new: the Bullpups come from the Hasegawa air-to-ground missile set, the drop tanks are leftover pieces from a Hobby Boss F-86. They are much more 'delicate', and make the Fury look less stout and cumbersome. The guidance pod for the Bullpups (a typical FJ-4B feature with these weapons) is a WWII drop tank, shaped with the help of benchmark pictures. Certainly not perfect, but, hey - it's just a MODEL!

  

Painting and markings

I used mid-1950ies MLD Sea Furys and Sea Hawks as a design benchmark, but this Fury is placed just into the time frame around 1960 when the MLD introduced a new 3-digit code system. Before that, a code "6-XX" with the XX somewhere in the 70 region would have been appropriate, and I actually painted the fuselage sides a bit darker so as if the old code had recently been painted over.

 

Dutch MLD aircraft tended to keep their former users’ liveries, but in the FJ-4B’s case I thought that a light grey and white aircraft (USN style) with Dutch roundels would look a bit odd. So I settled for early NATO style with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper sides (Humbrol 123) and Sky from below (Testors 2049 from their Authentic Line).

 

I also went for an early design style with a low waterline - early Hawker Sea Furies were painted this way, and a high waterline would probably be more typical. But in the face of potential seriosu action, who knows...? Things tend to be toned down quickly, just remember the RN Harriers during the Falkland conflict. I'll admit that the aircraft looks a bit simple and dull now, but this IMHO just adds to the plausible look of this whif. I prefer such subtleties to garish designs.

 

The surfaces were weathered with dry-brushed lighter shades of the basic tones (mostly Humbrol 79, but also some 140 and 67, and Humbrol 90 and 166 below), including overpainted old codes in a slightly darker tone of EDSG, done with Revell 77. A light wash with black ink emphasizes edges and some details - the machine was not to look worn.

 

The interior was painted in medium grey (Humbrol 140), the landing gear is white (Humbrol 130), and some details like the air intake rim, the edges of the landing gear covers, the flaps or the tips of the wing fences were painted in bright red (Humbrol 174), for some contrast to the overall grey upper sides.

 

The MLD markings were puzzled together. The roundels come from an Xtradecal sheet for various Hawker Sea Furies, the '202' code comes, among others, from a Grumman Bearcat aftermarket sheet. The 'KON. MARINE' line is hand-made, letter by letter, from a TL Modellbau aftremarket sheet.

Most stencils and warning sign decals come from the original decal sheet, as well as from a FJ-4 Xtradecal aftermarket sheet, from F-86 kits and the scrap box. I wanted these details to provide the color to the aircraft, so that it would not look too uniform, but still without flashy decorations and like a rather utilarian military item.

 

finally, the model received a coat of semi-matt varnish (Tamiya Acryllic), since MLD aircraft had a pretty glossy finish. No dirt or soot stains were added - the Dutch kept their (few) shipborne aircraft very clean and tidy!

  

So, all in all, a simple looking aircraft, but this Dutch Fury has IMHO a certain, subtle charm - probably also because it is a rather rare and unpopular aircraft, which in itself has a certain whiffy aura.

History of St Gabriel’s

Early History of St Gabriel’s

 

A study of the 1895 Ordnance Survey map of Byker and Heaton reveals a building described as St Gabriel’s Church but this building is not where you would expect it to be on Heaton Road. It is to the east of Chillingham Road on the north side of a road that is not named but can be recognised as present day Rothbury Terrace. To the south is a cricket ground and a football ground.There is a record that states that in 1890 ‘the wooden building was replaced with a structure of corrugated iron lined with wood, costing £500, with seats for 350. It is not known whether the wooden building had also been a church. The building was known as St Gabriel’s Iron Mission Chapel and was a daughter church of St Michael’s, Byker.

 

Also in 1890 Lord Armstrong gave a new site for a permanent church to be built on the west side of Heaton Road near to its northern end and opposite a row of large villas between Simonside and Cartington Terraces. The architect appointed was Mr Frank W Rich and the Archdeacon of Northumberland recommended Mr Rich to prepare plans for a permanent church to be built in the Gothic design with a tower, a nave and one aisle, to hold 500 but capable of being enlarged to hold 600. Plans were submitted to Lord Armstrong for his approval. The site of the new church on Heaton Road was found in 1896 to be too narrow to accommodate a large church built on a cruciform shape. Lord Armstrong generously gave another sit directly north of the original site. On 1st December Bishop Edgar agreed that the architect Mr F W Rich should build a new stone church on the new site. The building contractor appointed was Mr Walter Baston, a member of St Gabriel’s congregation.

 

The foundation stone was laid by Mrs. Watson-Armstrong. Under the foundation stone was placed a description of the building, plans, local newspaper and coins. (The location of the foundation stone is unknown.) The Consecration of St. Gabriel’s Church by Bishop Jacob took place on Friday, 29th September 1899. A licence for Marriages was obtained in October and on 27th December 1899 Queen Victoria sanctioned the formation of the new Parish.

 

Spot the difference!

 

That takes us to until 29th September 1899, when the church was consecrated. As the postcard below illustrates this was only stage one of the construction.

 

The most obvious missing feature is the tower but if the building looks a bit short it is because the chancel is missing. The lower building at the south east corner was temporary vestries and the chimney was for the boiler in the cellar. Next time you are passing see if you can still find a chimney. There are no pinnacles on the turrets at the west end. The card was stamped with a Newcastle upon Tyne post mark at 5 pm AU 20 04.

 

It also shows pillars supporting a gate leading to the vicarage. There is a 1901 record that Mr Watson-Armstrong, Lord Armstrong’s nephew and heir kindly gave a site at the west end of the Church for a vicarage. An anonymous donor gave £1,000 towards the cost and a grant was made available from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners of £1,300. Mr Rich was given instructions to prepare plans. The clergy (vicar and two curates) plus housekeeper (Miss Welch) and maid moved into the new vicarage in May 1903. They had been living at 8 Rothbury Terrace. The new vicarage cost £3,500.

 

An extract from the April 1901 magazine reads:

“The enlargement of St Gabriel’s is an absolute necessary. It is admitted by all that the Church is too small, especially Sunday evenings when we are crowded out and very often would be worshipers have to go away as they cannot find a seat. We must, therefore, consider a scheme for the enlargement of the Church and provision for increased accommodation.”

 

And in a similar tone in October 1904:

“We have been told that people sometimes stay away from church on Sunday evenings because there is some difficulty in getting seats. The Bishop has consented to the North aisle being used before it is actually consecrated. We are glad to find how much more the North aisle has been appreciated; it is indeed a wonderful improvement to the church and it helps to see more of what it will be like when completed. We can now much more readily picture to ourselves how fine the effect will be when the North Transept arch is opened and the chancel added.”

 

Clearly building work is progressing and in 1905 we read that the dedication and consecration of the new parts of the church took place on 29 September. This was carried out by the Bishop and included the chancel, organ chamber, north aisle and transept and the porches at a cost of £14,000.

 

Also in 1905 the lower part of the tower was built and donated by Lord Armstrong. The next mention of the tower is in 1907 when it is noted that the Sale of Work was opened by Lord Armstrong and afforded an opportunity of thanking him for his generosity to St Gabriel’s. His latest gift was the tower by now making steady progress

 

Lord Armstrong also paid for the inscription around the top of the tower. The architect asked the vicar for a suitable engraving to go around the four sides and he choose the Sanctus:

 

Holy Holy Holy, Lord God of Hosts, | Heaven and Earth are full | of your Glory. Glory be to thee | Lord most High. Amen Alleluia

 

It was started on the south side as a result the east side on Heaton

 

Road reads Heaven and Earth are full! This was enough for a lady to write to the vicar and ask “…what is to become of me?” The tower is 99 feet high and some of the lettering is now showing its age.

 

In the parish magazine in July 1909, the Vicar, Churchwardens and Building Fund Committee wrote collectively regarding the inadequacy of the temporary vestries. The erection of permanent vestries were the next portion of the church extension scheme to be built. The new choir vestry would be a room sufficiently to provide for parish meetings, classes etc. This article appears to have had the desired effect as in September 1910 the Archdeacon of Northumberland dedicated new vestries for the Clergy, Churchwardens and Choir as well as two smaller rooms. Various furnishings were also dedicated but more about them another time.

 

This post card has a post mark of 1 Nov 15. The vestries mentioned above have been completed but there is clearly work to be done on the south side of the chancel. This is where the Lady Chapel now stands. It may have remained like this until 1930/31.

 

At the annual meeting in the spring of 1914 the vicar reported that an application for a grant for completion of the church had been declined by the Bishop but that he, the Bishop, would recommend a grant for a Parish Hall with rooms. A grant of £500 was awarded in August 1915 on condition that the congregation found the balance, around £1,250 by June 1916. At this stage the plan was to build on the site of the iron building on Rothbury Terrace, the City Council having indicated that it must be removed by 1917 due to its deteriorating condition.

 

A canteen was opened in the Iron Building from 5.30pm to 9.30pm for soldiers billeted in the parish.

The Iron Building was sold in 1919 for £150 having served as a church and parish hall for 30 years. This meant that there was no hall for social events. Lord Armstrong made available an allotment site on Chillingham Road at half its commercial value but it is not until 1923 that the Bishop agreed a free grant of £2,000 and a loan of £1,500. Plans were submitted for a hall to accommodate 500 with other rooms of varying sizes for classes and recreation.

 

The foundation stone was not laid until 6th September 1924. Then there were concerns about the slowness of the work and questions were being asked about what was going on behind the hoardings Chillingham Road/Cartington Terrace corner. Delays were caused by fresh negotiations with the contractors over costs and then a builders strike. The building was eventually blessed on 3rd December 1925.

 

It was to take until 1930 before the final phase of building work consisting of the South Transept and Lady Chapel was agreed. At this time it was decided to abandon the original plan for a Baptistry. This was to have been in the south west corner beside the porch. You can see the undressed stone on the post card at the beginning of this article. It is still undressed today partly hidden by a bay tree.

The final building work was completed in 1931 and dedicated by the Bishop on 4th October 1931. He also dedicated many internal features.

 

Newcastle upon Tyne, or simply Newcastle is a cathedral city and metropolitan borough in Tyne and Wear, England. It is located on the River Tyne's northern bank, opposite Gateshead to the south. It is the most populous settlement in the Tyneside conurbation and North East England.

 

Newcastle developed around a Roman settlement called Pons Aelius, the settlement became known as Monkchester before taking on the name of a castle built in 1080 by William the Conqueror's eldest son, Robert Curthose. It was one of the world's largest ship building and repair centres during the industrial revolution. Newcastle was part of the county of Northumberland until 1400, when it separated and formed a county of itself. In 1974, Newcastle became part of Tyne and Wear. Since 2018, the city council has been part of the North of Tyne Combined Authority.

 

The history of Newcastle upon Tyne dates back almost 2,000 years, during which it has been controlled by the Romans, the Angles and the Norsemen amongst others. Newcastle upon Tyne was originally known by its Roman name Pons Aelius. The name "Newcastle" has been used since the Norman conquest of England. Due to its prime location on the River Tyne, the town developed greatly during the Middle Ages and it was to play a major role in the Industrial Revolution, being granted city status in 1882. Today, the city is a major retail, commercial and cultural centre.

 

Roman settlement

The history of Newcastle dates from AD 122, when the Romans built the first bridge to cross the River Tyne at that point. The bridge was called Pons Aelius or 'Bridge of Aelius', Aelius being the family name of Roman Emperor Hadrian, who was responsible for the Roman wall built across northern England along the Tyne–Solway gap. Hadrian's Wall ran through present-day Newcastle, with stretches of wall and turrets visible along the West Road, and at a temple in Benwell. Traces of a milecastle were found on Westgate Road, midway between Clayton Street and Grainger Street, and it is likely that the course of the wall corresponded to present-day Westgate Road. The course of the wall can be traced eastwards to the Segedunum Roman fort at Wallsend, with the fort of Arbeia down-river at the mouth of the Tyne, on the south bank in what is now South Shields. The Tyne was then a wider, shallower river at this point and it is thought that the bridge was probably about 700 feet (210 m) long, made of wood and supported on stone piers. It is probable that it was sited near the current Swing Bridge, due to the fact that Roman artefacts were found there during the building of the latter bridge. Hadrian himself probably visited the site in 122. A shrine was set up on the completed bridge in 123 by the 6th Legion, with two altars to Neptune and Oceanus respectively. The two altars were subsequently found in the river and are on display in the Great North Museum in Newcastle.

 

The Romans built a stone-walled fort in 150 to protect the river crossing which was at the foot of the Tyne Gorge, and this took the name of the bridge so that the whole settlement was known as Pons Aelius. The fort was situated on a rocky outcrop overlooking the new bridge, on the site of the present Castle Keep. Pons Aelius is last mentioned in 400, in a Roman document listing all of the Roman military outposts. It is likely that nestling in the shadow of the fort would have been a small vicus, or village. Unfortunately, no buildings have been detected; only a few pieces of flagging. It is clear that there was a Roman cemetery near Clavering Place, behind the Central station, as a number of Roman coffins and sarcophagi have been unearthed there.

 

Despite the presence of the bridge, the settlement of Pons Aelius was not particularly important among the northern Roman settlements. The most important stations were those on the highway of Dere Street running from Eboracum (York) through Corstopitum (Corbridge) and to the lands north of the Wall. Corstopitum, being a major arsenal and supply centre, was much larger and more populous than Pons Aelius.

 

Anglo-Saxon development

The Angles arrived in the North-East of England in about 500 and may have landed on the Tyne. There is no evidence of an Anglo-Saxon settlement on or near the site of Pons Aelius during the Anglo-Saxon age. The bridge probably survived and there may well have been a small village at the northern end, but no evidence survives. At that time the region was dominated by two kingdoms, Bernicia, north of the Tees and ruled from Bamburgh, and Deira, south of the Tees and ruled from York. Bernicia and Deira combined to form the kingdom of Northanhymbra (Northumbria) early in the 7th century. There were three local kings who held the title of Bretwalda – 'Lord of Britain', Edwin of Deira (627–632), Oswald of Bernicia (633–641) and Oswy of Northumbria (641–658). The 7th century became known as the 'Golden Age of Northumbria', when the area was a beacon of culture and learning in Europe. The greatness of this period was based on its generally Christian culture and resulted in the Lindisfarne Gospels amongst other treasures. The Tyne valley was dotted with monasteries, with those at Monkwearmouth, Hexham and Jarrow being the most famous. Bede, who was based at Jarrow, wrote of a royal estate, known as Ad Murum, 'at the Wall', 12 miles (19 km) from the sea. It is thought that this estate may have been in what is now Newcastle. At some unknown time, the site of Newcastle came to be known as Monkchester. The reason for this title is unknown, as we are unaware of any specific monasteries at the site, and Bede made no reference to it. In 875 Halfdan Ragnarsson, the Danish Viking conqueror of York, led an army that attacked and pillaged various monasteries in the area, and it is thought that Monkchester was also pillaged at this time. Little more was heard of it until the coming of the Normans.

 

Norman period

After the arrival of William the Conqueror in England in 1066, the whole of England was quickly subjected to Norman rule. However, in Northumbria there was great resistance to the Normans, and in 1069 the newly appointed Norman Earl of Northumbria, Robert de Comines and 700 of his men were killed by the local population at Durham. The Northumbrians then marched on York, but William was able to suppress the uprising. That same year, a second uprising occurred when a Danish fleet landed in the Humber. The Northumbrians again attacked York and destroyed the garrison there. William was again able to suppress the uprising, but this time he took revenge. He laid waste to the whole of the Midlands and the land from York to the Tees. In 1080, William Walcher, the Norman bishop of Durham and his followers were brutally murdered at Gateshead. This time Odo, bishop of Bayeux, William's half brother, devastated the land between the Tees and the Tweed. This was known as the 'Harrying of the North'. This devastation is reflected in the Domesday Book. The destruction had such an effect that the North remained poor and backward at least until Tudor times and perhaps until the Industrial Revolution. Newcastle suffered in this respect with the rest of the North.

 

In 1080 William sent his eldest son, Robert Curthose, north to defend the kingdom against the Scots. After his campaign, he moved to Monkchester and began the building of a 'New Castle'. This was of the "motte-and-bailey" type of construction, a wooden tower on top of an earthen mound (motte), surrounded by a moat and wooden stockade (bailey). It was this castle that gave Newcastle its name. In 1095 the Earl of Northumbria, Robert de Mowbray, rose up against the king, William Rufus, and Rufus sent an army north to recapture the castle. From then on the castle became crown property and was an important base from which the king could control the northern barons. The Northumbrian earldom was abolished and a Sheriff of Northumberland was appointed to administer the region. In 1091 the parish church of St Nicholas was consecrated on the site of the present Anglican cathedral, close by the bailey of the new castle. The church is believed to have been a wooden building on stone footings.

 

Not a trace of the tower or mound of the motte and bailey castle remains now. Henry II replaced it with a rectangular stone keep, which was built between 1172 and 1177 at a cost of £1,444. A stone bailey, in the form of a triangle, replaced the previous wooden one. The great outer gateway to the castle, called 'the Black Gate', was built later, between 1247 and 1250, in the reign of Henry III. There were at that time no town walls and when attacked by the Scots, the townspeople had to crowd into the bailey for safety. It is probable that the new castle acted as a magnet for local merchants because of the safety it provided. This in turn would help to expand trade in the town. At this time wool, skins and lead were being exported, whilst alum, pepper and ginger were being imported from France and Flanders.

 

Middle Ages

Throughout the Middle Ages, Newcastle was England's northern fortress, the centre for assembled armies. The Border war against Scotland lasted intermittently for several centuries – possibly the longest border war ever waged. During the civil war between Stephen and Matilda, David 1st of Scotland and his son were granted Cumbria and Northumberland respectively, so that for a period from 1139 to 1157, Newcastle was effectively in Scottish hands. It is believed that during this period, King David may have built the church of St Andrew and the Benedictine nunnery in Newcastle. However, King Stephen's successor, Henry II was strong enough to take back the Earldom of Northumbria from Malcolm IV.

 

The Scots king William the Lion was imprisoned in Newcastle, in 1174, after being captured at the Battle of Alnwick. Edward I brought the Stone of Scone and William Wallace south through the town and Newcastle was successfully defended against the Scots three times during the 14th century.

 

Around 1200, stone-faced, clay-filled jetties were starting to project into the river, an indication that trade was increasing in Newcastle. As the Roman roads continued to deteriorate, sea travel was gaining in importance. By 1275 Newcastle was the sixth largest wool exporting port in England. The principal exports at this time were wool, timber, coal, millstones, dairy produce, fish, salt and hides. Much of the developing trade was with the Baltic countries and Germany. Most of the Newcastle merchants were situated near the river, below the Castle. The earliest known charter was dated 1175 in the reign of Henry II, giving the townspeople some control over their town. In 1216 King John granted Newcastle a mayor[8] and also allowed the formation of guilds (known as Mysteries). These were cartels formed within different trades, which restricted trade to guild members. There were initially twelve guilds. Coal was being exported from Newcastle by 1250, and by 1350 the burgesses received a royal licence to export coal. This licence to export coal was jealously guarded by the Newcastle burgesses, and they tried to prevent any one else on the Tyne from exporting coal except through Newcastle. The burgesses similarly tried to prevent fish from being sold anywhere else on the Tyne except Newcastle. This led to conflicts with Gateshead and South Shields.

 

In 1265, the town was granted permission to impose a 'Wall Tax' or Murage, to pay for the construction of a fortified wall to enclose the town and protect it from Scottish invaders. The town walls were not completed until early in the 14th century. They were two miles (3 km) long, 9 feet (2.7 m) thick and 25 feet (7.6 m) high. They had six main gates, as well as some smaller gates, and had 17 towers. The land within the walls was divided almost equally by the Lort Burn, which flowed southwards and joined the Tyne to the east of the Castle. The town began to expand north of the Castle and west of the Lort Burn with various markets being set up within the walls.

 

In 1400 Henry IV granted a new charter, creating a County corporate which separated the town, but not the Castle, from the county of Northumberland and recognised it as a "county of itself" with a right to have a sheriff of its own. The burgesses were now allowed to choose six aldermen who, with the mayor would be justices of the peace. The mayor and sheriff were allowed to hold borough courts in the Guildhall.

 

Religious houses

During the Middle Ages a number of religious houses were established within the walls: the first of these was the Benedictine nunnery of St Bartholomew founded in 1086 near the present-day Nun Street. Both David I of Scotland and Henry I of England were benefactors of the religious house. Nothing of the nunnery remains now.

 

The friary of Blackfriars, Newcastle (Dominican) was established in 1239. These were also known as the Preaching Friars or Shod Friars, because they wore sandals, as opposed to other orders. The friary was situated in the present-day Friars Street. In 1280 the order was granted royal permission to make a postern in the town walls to communicate with their gardens outside the walls. On 19 June 1334, Edward Balliol, claimant to be King of Scotland, did homage to King Edward III, on behalf of the kingdom of Scotland, in the church of the friary. Much of the original buildings of the friary still exist, mainly because, after the Dissolution of the Monasteries the friary of Blackfriars was rented out by the corporation to nine of the local trade guilds.

 

The friary of Whitefriars (Carmelite) was established in 1262. The order was originally housed on the Wall Knoll in Pandon, but in 1307 it took over the buildings of another order, which went out of existence, the Friars of the Sac. The land, which had originally been given by Robert the Bruce, was situated in the present-day Hanover Square, behind the Central station. Nothing of the friary remains now.

 

The friary of Austinfriars (Augustinian) was established in 1290. The friary was on the site where the Holy Jesus Hospital was built in 1682. The friary was traditionally the lodging place of English kings whenever they visited or passed through Newcastle. In 1503 Princess Margaret, eldest daughter of Henry VII of England, stayed two days at the friary on her way to join her new husband James IV of Scotland.

 

The friary of Greyfriars (Franciscans) was established in 1274. The friary was in the present-day area between Pilgrim Street, Grey Street, Market Street and High Chare. Nothing of the original buildings remains.

 

The friary of the Order of the Holy Trinity, also known as the Trinitarians, was established in 1360. The order devoted a third of its income to buying back captives of the Saracens, during the Crusades. Their house was on the Wall Knoll, in Pandon, to the east of the city, but within the walls. Wall Knoll had previously been occupied by the White Friars until they moved to new premises in 1307.

 

All of the above religious houses were closed in about 1540, when Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries.

 

An important street running through Newcastle at the time was Pilgrim Street, running northwards inside the walls and leading to the Pilgrim Gate on the north wall. The street still exists today as arguably Newcastle's main shopping street.

 

Tudor period

The Scottish border wars continued for much of the 16th century, so that during that time, Newcastle was often threatened with invasion by the Scots, but also remained important as a border stronghold against them.

 

During the Reformation begun by Henry VIII in 1536, the five Newcastle friaries and the single nunnery were dissolved and the land was sold to the Corporation and to rich merchants. At this time there were fewer than 60 inmates of the religious houses in Newcastle. The convent of Blackfriars was leased to nine craft guilds to be used as their headquarters. This probably explains why it is the only one of the religious houses whose building survives to the present day. The priories at Tynemouth and Durham were also dissolved, thus ending the long-running rivalry between Newcastle and the church for control of trade on the Tyne. A little later, the property of the nunnery of St Bartholomew and of Grey Friars were bought by Robert Anderson, who had the buildings demolished to build his grand Newe House (also known as Anderson Place).

 

With the gradual decline of the Scottish border wars the town walls were allowed to decline as well as the castle. By 1547, about 10,000 people were living in Newcastle. At the beginning of the 16th century exports of wool from Newcastle were more than twice the value of exports of coal, but during the century coal exports continued to increase.

 

Under Edward VI, John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, sponsored an act allowing Newcastle to annexe Gateshead as its suburb. The main reason for this was to allow the Newcastle Hostmen, who controlled the export of Tyne coal, to get their hands on the Gateshead coal mines, previously controlled by the Bishop of Durham. However, when Mary I came to power, Dudley met his downfall and the decision was reversed. The Reformation allowed private access to coal mines previously owned by Tynemouth and Durham priories and as a result coal exports increase dramatically, from 15,000 tons in 1500 to 35,000 tons in 1565, and to 400,000 tons in 1625.

 

The plague visited Newcastle four times during the 16th century, in 1579 when 2,000 people died, in 1589 when 1700 died, in 1595 and finally in 1597.

 

In 1600 Elizabeth I granted Newcastle a charter for an exclusive body of electors, the right to elect the mayor and burgesses. The charter also gave the Hostmen exclusive rights to load coal at any point on the Tyne. The Hostmen developed as an exclusive group within the Merchant Adventurers who had been incorporated by a charter in 1547.

 

Stuart period

In 1636 there was a serious outbreak of bubonic plague in Newcastle. There had been several previous outbreaks of the disease over the years, but this was the most serious. It is thought to have arrived from the Netherlands via ships that were trading between the Tyne and that country. It first appeared in the lower part of the town near the docks but gradually spread to all parts of the town. As the disease gained hold the authorities took measures to control it by boarding up any properties that contained infected persons, meaning that whole families were locked up together with the infected family members. Other infected persons were put in huts outside the town walls and left to die. Plague pits were dug next to the town's four churches and outside the town walls to receive the bodies in mass burials. Over the course of the outbreak 5,631 deaths were recorded out of an estimated population of 12,000, a death rate of 47%.

 

In 1637 Charles I tried to raise money by doubling the 'voluntary' tax on coal in return for allowing the Newcastle Hostmen to regulate production and fix prices. This caused outrage amongst the London importers and the East Anglian shippers. Both groups decided to boycott Tyne coal and as a result forced Charles to reverse his decision in 1638.

 

In 1640 during the Second Bishops' War, the Scots successfully invaded Newcastle. The occupying army demanded £850 per day from the Corporation to billet the Scottish troops. Trade from the Tyne ground to a halt during the occupation. The Scots left in 1641 after receiving a Parliamentary pardon and a £4,000,000 loan from the town.

 

In 1642 the English Civil War began. King Charles realised the value of the Tyne coal trade and therefore garrisoned Newcastle. A Royalist was appointed as governor. At that time, Newcastle and King's Lynn were the only important seaports to support the crown. In 1644 Parliament blockaded the Tyne to prevent the king from receiving revenue from the Tyne coal trade. Coal exports fell from 450,000 to 3,000 tons and London suffered a hard winter without fuel. Parliament encouraged the coal trade from the Wear to try to replace that lost from Newcastle but that was not enough to make up for the lost Tyneside tonnage.

 

In 1644 the Scots crossed the border. Newcastle strengthened its defences in preparation. The Scottish army, with 40,000 troops, besieged Newcastle for three months until the garrison of 1,500 surrendered. During the siege, the Scots bombarded the walls with their artillery, situated in Gateshead and Castle Leazes. The Scottish commander threatened to destroy the steeple of St Nicholas's Church by gunfire if the mayor, Sir John Marley, did not surrender the town. The mayor responded by placing Scottish prisoners that they had captured in the steeple, so saving it from destruction. The town walls were finally breached by a combination of artillery and sapping. In gratitude for this defence, Charles gave Newcastle the motto 'Fortiter Defendit Triumphans' to be added to its coat of arms. The Scottish army occupied Northumberland and Durham for two years. The coal taxes had to pay for the Scottish occupation. In 1645 Charles surrendered to the Scots and was imprisoned in Newcastle for nine months. After the Civil War the coal trade on the Tyne soon picked up and exceeded its pre-war levels.

 

A new Guildhall was completed on the Sandhill next to the river in 1655, replacing an earlier facility damaged by fire in 1639, and became the meeting place of Newcastle Town Council. In 1681 the Hospital of the Holy Jesus was built partly on the site of the Austin Friars. The Guildhall and Holy Jesus Hospital still exist.

 

Charles II tried to impose a charter on Newcastle to give the king the right to appoint the mayor, sheriff, recorder and town clerk. Charles died before the charter came into effect. In 1685, James II tried to replace Corporation members with named Catholics. However, James' mandate was suspended in 1689 after the Glorious Revolution welcoming William of Orange. In 1689, after the fall of James II, the people of Newcastle tore down his bronze equestrian statue in Sandhill and tossed it into the Tyne. The bronze was later used to make bells for All Saints Church.

 

In 1689 the Lort Burn was covered over. At this time it was an open sewer. The channel followed by the Lort Burn became the present day Dean Street. At that time, the centre of Newcastle was still the Sandhill area, with many merchants living along the Close or on the Side. The path of the main road through Newcastle ran from the single Tyne bridge, through Sandhill to the Side, a narrow street which climbed steeply on the north-east side of the castle hill until it reached the higher ground alongside St Nicholas' Church. As Newcastle developed, the Side became lined with buildings with projecting upper stories, so that the main street through Newcastle was a narrow, congested, steep thoroughfare.

 

In 1701 the Keelmen's Hospital was built in the Sandgate area of the city, using funds provided by the keelmen. The building still stands today.

 

Eighteenth century

In the 18th century, Newcastle was the country's largest print centre after London, Oxford and Cambridge, and the Literary and Philosophical Society of 1793, with its erudite debates and large stock of books in several languages predated the London Library by half a century.

 

In 1715, during the Jacobite rising in favour of the Old Pretender, an army of Jacobite supporters marched on Newcastle. Many of the Northumbrian gentry joined the rebels. The citizens prepared for its arrival by arresting Jacobite supporters and accepting 700 extra recruits into the local militia. The gates of the city were closed against the rebels. This proved enough to delay an attack until reinforcements arrived forcing the rebel army to move across to the west coast. The rebels finally surrendered at Preston.

 

In 1745, during a second Jacobite rising in favour of the Young Pretender, a Scottish army crossed the border led by Bonnie Prince Charlie. Once again Newcastle prepared by arresting Jacobite supporters and inducting 800 volunteers into the local militia. The town walls were strengthened, most of the gates were blocked up and some 200 cannon were deployed. 20,000 regulars were billeted on the Town Moor. These preparations were enough to force the rebel army to travel south via the west coast. They were eventually defeated at Culloden in 1746.

 

Newcastle's actions during the 1715 rising in resisting the rebels and declaring for George I, in contrast to the rest of the region, is the most likely source of the nickname 'Geordie', applied to people from Tyneside, or more accurately Newcastle. Another theory, however, is that the name 'Geordie' came from the inventor of the Geordie lamp, George Stephenson. It was a type of safety lamp used in mining, but was not invented until 1815. Apparently the term 'German Geordie' was in common use during the 18th century.

 

The city's first hospital, Newcastle Infirmary opened in 1753; it was funded by public subscription. A lying-in hospital was established in Newcastle in 1760. The city's first public hospital for mentally ill patients, Wardens Close Lunatic Hospital was opened in October 1767.

 

In 1771 a flood swept away much of the bridge at Newcastle. The bridge had been built in 1250 and repaired after a flood in 1339. The bridge supported various houses and three towers and an old chapel. A blue stone was placed in the middle of the bridge to mark the boundary between Newcastle and the Palatinate of Durham. A temporary wooden bridge had to be built, and this remained in use until 1781, when a new stone bridge was completed. The new bridge consisted of nine arches. In 1801, because of the pressure of traffic, the bridge had to be widened.

 

A permanent military presence was established in the city with the completion of Fenham Barracks in 1806. The facilities at the Castle for holding assizes, which had been condemned for their inconvenience and unhealthiness, were replaced when the Moot Hall opened in August 1812.

 

Victorian period

Present-day Newcastle owes much of its architecture to the work of the builder Richard Grainger, aided by architects John Dobson, Thomas Oliver, John and Benjamin Green and others. In 1834 Grainger won a competition to produce a new plan for central Newcastle. He put this plan into effect using the above architects as well as architects employed in his own office. Grainger and Oliver had already built Leazes Terrace, Leazes Crescent and Leazes Place between 1829 and 1834. Grainger and Dobson had also built the Royal Arcade at the foot of Pilgrim Street between 1830 and 1832. The most ambitious project covered 12 acres 12 acres (49,000 m2) in central Newcastle, on the site of Newe House (also called Anderson Place). Grainger built three new thoroughfares, Grey Street, Grainger Street and Clayton Street with many connecting streets, as well as the Central Exchange and the Grainger Market. John Wardle and George Walker, working in Grainger's office, designed Clayton Street, Grainger Street and most of Grey Street. Dobson designed the Grainger Market and much of the east side of Grey Street. John and Benjamin Green designed the Theatre Royal at the top of Grey Street, where Grainger placed the column of Grey's Monument as a focus for the whole scheme. Grey Street is considered to be one of the finest streets in the country, with its elegant curve. Unfortunately most of old Eldon Square was demolished in the 1960s in the name of progress. The Royal Arcade met a similar fate.

 

In 1849 a new bridge was built across the river at Newcastle. This was the High Level Bridge, designed by Robert Stephenson, and slightly up river from the existing bridge. The bridge was designed to carry road and rail traffic across the Tyne Gorge on two decks with rail traffic on the upper deck and road traffic on the lower. The new bridge meant that traffic could pass through Newcastle without having to negotiate the steep, narrow Side, as had been necessary for centuries. The bridge was opened by Queen Victoria, who one year later opened the new Central Station, designed by John Dobson. Trains were now able to cross the river, directly into the centre of Newcastle and carry on up to Scotland. The Army Riding School was also completed in 1849.

 

In 1854 a large fire started on the Gateshead quayside and an explosion caused it to spread across the river to the Newcastle quayside. A huge conflagration amongst the narrow alleys, or 'chares', destroyed the homes of 800 families as well as many business premises. The narrow alleys that had been destroyed were replaced by streets containing blocks of modern offices.

 

In 1863 the Town Hall in St Nicholas Square replaced the Guildhall as the meeting place of Newcastle Town Council.

 

In 1876 the low level bridge was replaced by a new bridge known as the Swing Bridge, so called because the bridge was able to swing horizontally on a central axis and allow ships to pass on either side. This meant that for the first time sizeable ships could pass up-river beyond Newcastle. The bridge was built and paid for by William Armstrong, a local arms manufacturer, who needed to have warships access his Elswick arms factory to fit armaments to them. The Swing Bridge's rotating mechanism is adapted from the cannon mounts developed in Armstrong's arms works. In 1882 the Elswick works began to build ships as well as to arm them. The Barrack Road drill hall was completed in 1890.

 

Industrialisation

In the 19th century, shipbuilding and heavy engineering were central to the city's prosperity; and the city was a powerhouse of the Industrial Revolution. Newcastle's development as a major city owed most to its central role in the production and export of coal. The phrase "taking coals to Newcastle" was first recorded in 1538; it proverbially denotes bringing a particular commodity to a place that has more than enough of it already.

 

Innovation in Newcastle and surrounding areas included the following:

 

George Stephenson developed a miner's safety lamp at the same time that Humphry Davy developed a rival design. The lamp made possible the opening up of ever deeper mines to provide the coal that powered the industrial revolution.

George and his son Robert Stephenson were hugely influential figures in the development of the early railways. George developed Blücher, a locomotive working at Killingworth colliery in 1814, whilst Robert was instrumental in the design of Rocket, a revolutionary design that was the forerunner of modern locomotives. Both men were involved in planning and building railway lines, all over this country and abroad.

 

Joseph Swan demonstrated a working electric light bulb about a year before Thomas Edison did the same in the USA. This led to a dispute as to who had actually invented the light bulb. Eventually the two rivals agreed to form a mutual company between them, the Edison and Swan Electric Light Company, known as Ediswan.

 

Charles Algernon Parsons invented the steam turbine, for marine use and for power generation. He used Turbinia, a small, turbine-powered ship, to demonstrate the speed that a steam turbine could generate. Turbinia literally ran rings around the British Fleet at a review at Spithead in 1897.

 

William Armstrong invented a hydraulic crane that was installed in dockyards up and down the country. He then began to design light, accurate field guns for the British army. These were a vast improvement on the existing guns that were then in use.

 

The following major industries developed in Newcastle or its surrounding area:

 

Glassmaking

A small glass industry existed in Newcastle from the mid-15th century. In 1615 restrictions were put on the use of wood for manufacturing glass. It was found that glass could be manufactured using the local coal, and so a glassmaking industry grew up on Tyneside. Huguenot glassmakers came over from France as refugees from persecution and set up glasshouses in the Skinnerburn area of Newcastle. Eventually, glass production moved to the Ouseburn area of Newcastle. In 1684 the Dagnia family, Sephardic Jewish emigrants from Altare, arrived in Newcastle from Stourbridge and established glasshouses along the Close, to manufacture high quality flint glass. The glass manufacturers used sand ballast from the boats arriving in the river as the main raw material. The glassware was then exported in collier brigs. The period from 1730 to 1785 was the highpoint of Newcastle glass manufacture, when the local glassmakers produced the 'Newcastle Light Baluster'. The glassmaking industry still exists in the west end of the city with local Artist and Glassmaker Jane Charles carrying on over four hundred years of hot glass blowing in Newcastle upon Tyne.

 

Locomotive manufacture

In 1823 George Stephenson and his son Robert established the world's first locomotive factory near Forth Street in Newcastle. Here they built locomotives for the Stockton and Darlington Railway and the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, as well as many others. It was here that the famous locomotive Rocket was designed and manufactured in preparation for the Rainhill Trials. Apart from building locomotives for the British market, the Newcastle works also produced locomotives for Europe and America. The Forth Street works continued to build locomotives until 1960.

 

Shipbuilding

In 1296 a wooden, 135 ft (41 m) long galley was constructed at the mouth of the Lort Burn in Newcastle, as part of a twenty-ship order from the king. The ship cost £205, and is the earliest record of shipbuilding in Newcastle. However the rise of the Tyne as a shipbuilding area was due to the need for collier brigs for the coal export trade. These wooden sailing ships were usually built locally, establishing local expertise in building ships. As ships changed from wood to steel, and from sail to steam, the local shipbuilding industry changed to build the new ships. Although shipbuilding was carried out up and down both sides of the river, the two main areas for building ships in Newcastle were Elswick, to the west, and Walker, to the east. By 1800 Tyneside was the third largest producer of ships in Britain. Unfortunately, after the Second World War, lack of modernisation and competition from abroad gradually caused the local industry to decline and die.

 

Armaments

In 1847 William Armstrong established a huge factory in Elswick, west of Newcastle. This was initially used to produce hydraulic cranes but subsequently began also to produce guns for both the army and the navy. After the Swing Bridge was built in 1876 allowing ships to pass up river, warships could have their armaments fitted alongside the Elswick works. Armstrong's company took over its industrial rival, Joseph Whitworth of Manchester in 1897.

 

Steam turbines

Charles Algernon Parsons invented the steam turbine and, in 1889, founded his own company C. A. Parsons and Company in Heaton, Newcastle to make steam turbines. Shortly after this, he realised that steam turbines could be used to propel ships and, in 1897, he founded a second company, Parsons Marine Steam Turbine Company in Wallsend. It is there that he designed and manufactured Turbinia. Parsons turbines were initially used in warships but soon came to be used in merchant and passenger vessels, including the liner Mauretania which held the blue riband for the Atlantic crossing until 1929. Parsons' company in Heaton began to make turbo-generators for power stations and supplied power stations all over the world. The Heaton works, reduced in size, remains as part of the Siemens AG industrial giant.

 

Pottery

In 1762 the Maling pottery was founded in Sunderland by French Huguenots, but transferred to Newcastle in 1817. A factory was built in the Ouseburn area of the city. The factory was rebuilt twice, finally occupying a 14-acre (57,000 m2) site that was claimed to be the biggest pottery in the world and which had its own railway station. The pottery pioneered use of machines in making potteries as opposed to hand production. In the 1890s the company went up-market and employed in-house designers. The period up to the Second World War was the most profitable with a constant stream of new designs being introduced. However, after the war, production gradually declined and the company closed in 1963.

 

Expansion of the city

Newcastle was one of the boroughs reformed by the Municipal Corporations Act 1835: the reformed municipal borough included the parishes of Byker, Elswick, Heaton, Jesmond, Newcastle All Saints, Newcastle St Andrew, Newcastle St John, Newcastle St Nicholas, and Westgate. The urban districts of Benwell and Fenham and Walker were added in 1904. In 1935, Newcastle gained Kenton and parts of the parishes of West Brunton, East Denton, Fawdon, Longbenton. The most recent expansion in Newcastle's boundaries took place under the Local Government Act 1972 on 1 April 1974, when Newcastle became a metropolitan borough, also including the urban districts of Gosforth and Newburn, and the parishes of Brunswick, Dinnington, Hazlerigg, North Gosforth and Woolsington from the Castle Ward Rural District, and the village of Westerhope.

 

Meanwhile Northumberland County Council was formed under the Local Government Act 1888 and benefited from a dedicated meeting place when County Hall was completed in the Castle Garth area of Newcastle in 1910. Following the Local Government Act 1972 County Hall relocated to Morpeth in April 1981.

 

Twentieth century

In 1925 work began on a new high-level road bridge to span the Tyne Gorge between Newcastle and Gateshead. The capacity of the existing High-Level Bridge and Swing Bridge were being strained to the limit, and an additional bridge had been discussed for a long time. The contract was awarded to the Dorman Long Company and the bridge was finally opened by King George V in 1928. The road deck was 84 feet (26 m) above the river and was supported by a 531 feet (162 m) steel arch. The new Tyne Bridge quickly became a symbol for Newcastle and Tyneside, and remains so today.

 

During the Second World War, Newcastle was largely spared the horrors inflicted upon other British cities bombed during the Blitz. Although the armaments factories and shipyards along the River Tyne were targeted by the Luftwaffe, they largely escaped unscathed. Manors goods yard and railway terminal, to the east of the city centre, and the suburbs of Jesmond and Heaton suffered bombing during 1941. There were 141 deaths and 587 injuries, a relatively small figure compared to the casualties in other industrial centres of Britain.

 

In 1963 the city gained its own university, the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, by act of parliament. A School of Medicine and Surgery had been established in Newcastle in 1834. This eventually developed into a college of medicine attached to Durham University. A college of physical science was also founded and became Armstrong College in 1904. In 1934 the two colleges merged to become King's College, Durham. This remained as part of Durham University until the new university was created in 1963. In 1992 the city gained its second university when Newcastle Polytechnic was granted university status as Northumbria University.

 

Newcastle City Council moved to the new Newcastle Civic Centre in 1968.

 

As heavy industries declined in the second half of the 20th century, large sections of the city centre were demolished along with many areas of slum housing. The leading political figure in the city during the 1960s was T. Dan Smith who oversaw a massive building programme of highrise housing estates and authorised the demolition of a quarter of the Georgian Grainger Town to make way for Eldon Square Shopping Centre. Smith's control in Newcastle collapsed when it was exposed that he had used public contracts to advantage himself and his business associates and for a time Newcastle became a byword for civic corruption as depicted in the films Get Carter and Stormy Monday and in the television series Our Friends in the North. However, much of the historic Grainger Town area survived and was, for the most part, fully restored in the late 1990s. Northumberland Street, initially the A1, was gradually closed to traffic from the 1970s and completely pedestrianised by 1998.

 

In 1978 a new rapid transport system, the Metro, was built, linking the Tyneside area. The system opened in August 1980. A new bridge was built to carry the Metro across the river between Gateshead and Newcastle. This was the Queen Elizabeth II Bridge, commonly known as the Metro Bridge. Eventually the Metro system was extended to reach Newcastle Airport in 1991, and in 2002 the Metro system was extended to the nearby city of Sunderland.

 

As the 20th century progressed, trade on the Newcastle and Gateshead quaysides gradually declined, until by the 1980s both sides of the river were looking rather derelict. Shipping company offices had closed along with offices of firms related to shipping. There were also derelict warehouses lining the riverbank. Local government produced a master plan to re-develop the Newcastle quayside and this was begun in the 1990s. New offices, restaurants, bars and residential accommodation were built and the area has changed in the space of a few years into a vibrant area, partially returning the focus of Newcastle to the riverside, where it was in medieval times.

 

The Gateshead Millennium Bridge, a foot and cycle bridge, 26 feet (7.9 m) wide and 413 feet (126 m) long, was completed in 2001. The road deck is in the form of a curve and is supported by a steel arch. To allow ships to pass, the whole structure, both arch and road-deck, rotates on huge bearings at either end so that the road deck is lifted. The bridge can be said to open and shut like a human eye. It is an important addition to the re-developed quayside area, providing a vital link between the Newcastle and Gateshead quaysides.

 

Recent developments

Today the city is a vibrant centre for office and retail employment, but just a short distance away there are impoverished inner-city housing estates, in areas originally built to provide affordable housing for employees of the shipyards and other heavy industries that lined the River Tyne. In the 2010s Newcastle City Council began implementing plans to regenerate these depressed areas, such as those along the Ouseburn Valley.

Towards the end of 1914, early in World War I, disturbing rumours began to circulate that the newest German submarines were capable of a much higher surface speed than British boats, one report giving their speed at about 22 knots. The rumours were sufficiently strong to force serious consideration of the matter by the Admiralty, and at the same time consideration was given to the idea that submarines should have a high enough surface speed to be able to work with the fleet. The reports concerning the speed of the German submarines proved to be spurious, but the idea of a British submarine with a high surface speed gained ground. The immediate result of this concern was the development of the J Class, which were unique with their three shafts. Originally eight boats were planned but this was reduced to six and then increased to seven. As a result of these changes the boats originally intended to be J7 and J8 were renumbered in April 1915 as J3 and J4 respectively.

 

J7's submerged displacement of 1,760 tons was 60 tons less than that of her sister boats. Her conning tower was located further aft and the gun was mounted in a lower position.

 

HMS J7 commissioned in the Royal Navy on 15 September 1917 under the command of Lieutenant Commander F.H.D. Byron RN and was allocated to a flotilla based at Blyth, Northumberland.

 

On 5 November 1917 J7 departed Blyth for her first patrol. Whilst on patrol in the North Sea on 6 March 1918 an enemy submarine was sighted, but J7 was unable to attack and the enemy passed from sight.

 

The submarine was under refit during April and May 1918 at Walker Naval Yard on the River Tyne. She sailed for patrol on 25 May and evaded a U-boat attack the same day.

 

On 10 July an enemy submarine was sighted and both vessels dived. Shortly after a sighting was made of an enemy submarine on the surface, going away, J7 surfaced, challenged and opened fire. The enemy dived. An enemy submarine was sighted on 23 July, but J7 was unable to attack and the enemy disappeared.

 

On 5 October 1918 J7 dived to intercept a reported submarine, but broke off the search without contact.

 

The boat was at sea when the Armistice was signed on 11 November 1918. She returned to Blyth on 15 November. On 19 February 1919 she proceeded to Jarrow.

 

Following the conclusion of hostilities in World War I, the Admiralty in 1918 presented the six remaining boats of the J Class to the Australian Government - J6 had been sunk in error in 1918 by a British ship. All the submarines commissioned into the Royal Australian Navy at Portsmouth on 25 March 1919, as tenders to the submarine depot ship HMAS Platypus, J7 being the senior boat, under the command of Lieutenant Commander Oswald E. Hallifax DSO RN.

 

The beam tubes were removed from all six J Class submarines before they sailed for Australia. The tubes were despatched separately to Garden Island. The reasons given for the removal were that the beam tubes were not a success and that increased accommodation was required.

  

HMS Submarine J7 off the River Tyne prior to sailing for Australia in February, 1919.

On 9 April 1919 Platypus and the submarines, escorted by the light cruiser HMAS Sydney, sailed from Portsmouth for Australia, their first two ports of call being Gibraltar and Valetta.

 

On the night of 28 April, the night before the vessels arrived at Port Said, J3's starboard main engine shaft snapped. Thus handicapped she could not keep up with the others and consequently on departure for Aden on 30 April, J3 was in tow of Sydney.

 

The vessels arrived at Aden on 5 May. On the same day the light cruiser HMAS Brisbane, which had left Portsmouth on 17 April, also arrived. On 7 May all the vessels sailed for Colombo. Brisbane took over the tow of J3 while Sydney took J5 in tow as that boat had also developed engine trouble. Three days after arrival at Colombo on 15 May, Brisbane sailed with J5 in tow, taking her all the way to Sydney, where they arrived on 27 June.

 

J3 was taken in hand at Colombo for repairs. On 31 May Sydney, J1, J2, J4 and J7 sailed for Singapore, followed on 2 June by Platypus and J3. The vessels were reunited at Singapore from where all except Sydney sailed on 18 June. Sydney sailed for Australia a few days later but did not rejoin the other vessels. On 29 June Platypus and the five submarines arrived at Thursday Island, although J7 was three hours late because of trouble with her engine lubricating system. The last call before Sydney was Brisbane, Sydney being reached on 15 July.

 

Having arrived in poor condition, the submarines were taken in hand at Garden Island Dockyard for refitting. After her refit was completed J7 sailed for the submarine base at Geelong, Victoria.

 

After uneventful service, little of which was spent at sea, J7 and her five sisters paid off into Reserve at Westernport on 12 July 1922. The boats had become victims of the worsening economic conditions of the time, coupled with their high cost of maintenance.

 

On 1 November 1929 J7 was sold to Morris and Watt Pty Ltd of South Melbourne. She was towed from Flinders Naval Depot, Crib Point, where she had served as a reserve source of electric power, on 4 December 1929. She was dismantled and the hull sunk in 1930 as a breakwater at the Sandringham Yacht Club, Sandringham, Port Phillip Bay, where it remain

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

A round towered church with a spire; somewhat unusual I imagine. Someone might like to correct me on that and I find its quite common.

 

I had seen shots of St George taken from the air by my Flickr friend, John Fielding. I decided to see if any of the churches he had snapped were near to my route to Cambridge, and found they were.

 

I did not think of going to Shimpling this day, but as this and Frenze are under the care of the Church Conservation Trust, an information board at the latter said I should go to the former if I enjoyed Frenze.

 

So I did.

 

Driving through Diss, trying to program the sat nav, easy as the main road through the town, under the railway bridge was a solid line of traffic, I only hoped that Shimpling would not be back the way I had just come.

 

The route took me through some of the narrow streets of the town centre, a place to go back to to explore I think, but my route took me out north through the modern houses then into the flat countryside of south Norfolk.

 

I arrived in Shimpling, a few houses and farms; where could the church be, and just as I was about to stop and annoy the lorry behind, I saw the information board at the start of the farm track leading to St George.

 

------------------------------------------

 

.

St George is a familiar sight to drivers between Ipswich and Norwich, off in the fields near Dickleburgh. A substantial, landmark church; and yet it is redundant. Coming from Suffolk, where the local Anglican Diocese goes out of its way to avoid redundancies if it can, Shimpling's redundancy seemed careless. This is not a tiny village, and if drawn into a group with Dickleburgh could surely have sustained a monthly service or so. Probably, if it arose nowadays, St George would not be declared redundant. From the point of view of the building, of course, it was both a blessing and a mercy, as the church is now in the capable, caring hands of the Churches Conservation Trust.

 

The setting of St George just to the south of its village is superb. A cart track leads up from a farm, difficult of access at the best of times, but suicide on this day when the snow still lay deep in the ruts, the mud sucking at our boots. If we had attempted to drive it then I guess the tractor would be getting to us about now. The keyholders both live about a mile off, but the walk was worth it.

 

St George is perhaps more typical of Suffolk than Norfolk, a rural church made opulent by the wealth of the later years of the 15th century. Then came the font, the benches, the roof, the surviving scattering of medieval angel glass. Otherwise, the feeling is of the much-maligned Victorians, who loved churches and wanted this one restored to its former glory. Geoffery Millard, rector through those times, has his memorial in the chancel, but all around it is the building that he would recognise instantly if he stepped into it today.

 

Amber light filled the space beneath the tower, and I was glad I was here, in this silent frozen space, this touchstone to the long generations. Some curiosities: under the benches at the west end, there is a trap door. Inside, some of the original medieval tiles have survived the Victorians; they merely built a wooden platform over them. Then, a wholly secular brass inscription of 1591 to Anthony le Grys is set in the mddle of the nave - but the inlay is the wrong size and shape, and so it must come originally from somewhere else. A small hole in the north wall of the sanctuary is surely too tiny to have been an aumbry. And yet, it is set back to take a door, and appears once to have had some sort of wooden tympanum set over it. Could it have been a squint from a shrine chapel? Or even from an anchorite's cell?

 

Incidentally, another curious thing: There is a Shimpling in Suffolk as well, and the churches of both are dedicated to St George, an otherwise unusual East Anglian dedication. The reason appears to be that the enthusiastic 18th century antiquarians, ruttling around in the Diocesan records at Norwich, accidentally applied the dedication of the Suffolk church to both, dedications having fallen out of use for two hundred years or more.

 

Simon Knott, March 2005

  

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/shimpling/shimpling.htm

 

-----------------------------------------

 

SHIMPLING

¶Is bounded on the east by Dickleburgh, on the west by Burston, on the south by Thelton, and on the north by Gissing. It is a rectory appendant to the manor, and being discharged of first fruits and tenths, is capable of augmentation. The rectory hath a house and 16 acres of glebe: Norwich Domesday says, that Richard de Boyland was then patron, that the rector had a house and xv. acres of land; that the procurations were then vi.s. viii.d. and the synodals xxii.d.

 

Rectors.

 

1305, 6 kal. Dec. Robert de Boswyle, accolite, William de Schympling.

 

1328, 7 kal. Mar. Will. de Schymplyng, accolite. Roger, son of Will. de Shympling.

 

1338, 12 July, John de Cherchegate, priest to St. George's church at Shympling. Ditto.

 

1349, Robert Sampson, priest. Emma, late wife of Roger de Schymplyng.

 

1361, 13 Sept. Ric. de Halle, priest. Ditto.

 

1362, 21 Sept. Peter Scott. Ditto.

 

1386, 19 April, Tho. de Welles. Thomas de Glemesford.

 

1393, 28 March, Welles changed this with John Mulle for Mildeston rectory, in Sarum diocese. Roger de Ellingham and Joan Hardegrey.

 

1396, 29 March, Mulle exchanged with Will. Stone for Ludenham in Kent. Ditto.

 

1401, 29 Aug. John Drury, priest, who resigned Watton vicarage in exchange for this. Roger de Elyngham.

 

1408, 7 Aug. John Cok of Illington, priest.

 

1421, 8 Octob. Reginald Pepper of Berton Bendysch, priest, on the resignation of Cok. Ditto.

 

1421, 6 March, Tho. Young, on Pepper's resignation. William, son of Roger de Elyngham of Elyngham, near Bungey.

 

1422, 22 March, Rich. Senyngwell, on Young's resignation. Ditto.

 

1430, 20 Sept. Walter Skyde of Disse. Lapse.

 

1432, 23 Octob. Thomas Wright. Lapse.

 

1434, 14 Dec. John Grygby. William Elyngham of Elyngham by Bungey.

 

1437, 12 Octob. Richard de Schymplyng, on Grygby's resignation. William Elyngham of Elyngham by Bungey.

 

1449, 31 Jan. Robert Caade, resigned to John Beest, in exchange for Winterburn Basset rectory, in Wiltshire. Ditto.

 

1451, 21 April, Thomas Messinger, on Beest's death. Ditto.

 

1504, John Odiham.

 

1507, 4 Aug. James Galle. (fn. 1) Lapse.

 

1525, 19 Octob. Thomas Warde. Thomas Shardelowe, Esq.

 

1536, 26 March, John Lanman, (fn. 2) on Ward's death. John Aldham, lord of the moiety of Elyngham's manor here, by turns.

 

1563, 26 June, Thomas Oxford, alias Farmor, A. M. Stephen Shardelowe, Gent.

 

1572, 24 Nov. William Luffkyn, on Oxford's resignation. Stephen Shardelowe, and John Aldham, patrons.

 

1609, 1 Aug. Nicholas Colte. (fn. 3) John Sherdelowe.

 

1642, Jeremiah Gowen. (fn. 4) Adrian Mott of Braintree, and Margaret Carter of Stratford in Essex.

 

1649, Thomas Cole, (fn. 5) clerk, A. M. John and James Mott, Gent.

 

1684, 9 Dec. John Rand. John Buxton, Esq. united to Burston.

 

1706, 1 Jan. John Calver, on Rand's death. Robert Buxton, Esq. united to Gissing.

 

1729, The Rev. Mr. Thomas Buxton, the present rector, [1736,] united to Thorp-Parva.

 

The Church hath a steeple, round at bottom, and octangular at top, and four small bells; it is leaded, though the chancel is thatched, and the north porch tiled. It is dedicated to St. George, (fn. 6) whose effigies, with his shield, viz. arg. a plain cross gul. is to be seen in a south window of the chancel, and seems to be as old as the building, which in all appearance was in the beginning of the thirteenth century, (though the steeple is much older,) for then William de Shimplyng was lord and patron, whose arms still remain under this effigies, viz. arg. a chief gul. a fess between six de-lises sab.

 

Here was a Gild in honour of the same saint, (fn. 7) and a Chapel dedicated to St. Mary, which stood in Shimpling Hithe, of which there are no remains. This had some endowment, for Girrard the Prior, (fn. 8) and his Chapter at Norwich, with the Bishop's consent, granted to Richard the chaplain of Shimpling, 7 roods of meadow in Roreker in Shimpling, &c. in perpetual alms, paying yearly 5d. at the high altar in the cathedral, to which John Pierson of Gissing, and others, were witnesses, (fn. 9) so that this must be before 1201, for in that year Gerrard the Prior died; this was down before the general dissolution, for I meet with no grant of it at that time.

 

St. George and the dragon, and the arms of Shimpling, are carved on the font; the chancel is covered with large grave-stones, all disrobed of their brasses; several of them were laid over the rectors, as appear from the chalice and wafer upon them, that being the symbol of a priest; the rest that had arms, I take to be laid over the Shimplings and the Shardelows. The arms of

 

Shardelow are, arg. a chevron gul. between three croslets fitchee, az. Crest, a plume of feathers arg.

 

On a small stone towards the west end of the church:

 

Richard Lesingham, ob. 5° die. Octob. Anno Dni. 1705, Ætatis suæ - - - -

 

Here let him rest, Memory stile him dear, 'Till our Redeemer Shall in the clouds appear.

 

On a marble near the pulpit: arms of

 

Potter, sab. a fess between three mullets arg. Crest, an elephant's head erased arg. gutte de sang.

 

Here in expectation of a joyful resurrection, resteth the body of Cicill Potter, Gent. who dyed Jan. the 29th, 1693, aged 70 years.

 

In a window:

 

Gloria in Errelsis Deo.

 

Here are twelve penny loaves given to as many poor people, by the rector and church-wardens, on the first Sunday in every month, there being land tied for it.

 

In the Confessor's time Torbert held this manor of Stigand, it being then worth 20s. of whom the part in Gissing was also held by another freeman, and was then of 5s. value, but was risen to ten in the Conqueror's time, though Shimpling continued at the same value. This, as one manor, was given by the Conqueror to Roger Bygod, who gave it to Robert de Vais, (de Vallibus, or Vaus,) it being then a mile and a quarter long, and a mile broad. (fn. 10) The whole paid 5d. Geld. There was then a church and 10 acres glebe, valued at 12d. and several other manors extended hither, of which I shall afterwards treat in their proper places. The Vaises held it of Bygod's successors, till 1237, in which year Oliver de Vallibus (fn. 11) granted it to Richard de Rupella, (afterwards called Rokele,) settling it on him and his heirs by fine, (fn. 12) to be held of him by knight's service; he died in 1287, at which time he held it of John de Vallibus. This Richard granted it to be held of him and his heirs by Richard de Boyland, in trust for Ralph Carbonell, (fn. 13) who held it of Maud, wife of William de Roos, who was daughter and coheir of John de Vaux. This Ralph conveyed it to

 

Roger de Schymplyng, to be held by knight's service of Richard Rokeles's heirs; and in 1280, the said Roger (fn. 14) was lord, the manor being settled upon him, and Emma his wife, in tail; after their deaths it came to William de Schympling, (fn. 15) their son, who held it of Richard Rokell at half a fee, he of the Earl-Marshal, and he of the King in capite. This William married Margaret de Tacolveston, (fn. 16) on whom the manor was settled for life in 1303, it being then held of William de Roos and Maud his wife, and Petronell de Vaux, her sister. This William purchased a great part of the town of divers persons. He had a son named Roger, who presented in 1328, and held it till about 1345, when he was dead, and Emma his wife had it, at whose death it fell divisible between their three daughters: (fn. 17)

 

Isabel, married to John Kirtling, to whom this manor was allotted;

 

Joan, who had Moring-Thorp manor, and

 

Katerine, married to William de Ellyngham, who had Dalling manor in Flordon. Isabell had issue, Roger and Emma, who left none, so that this manor and advowson descended to Roger, son of William de Elyngham and Katerine his wife, daughter of Roger de Schymplyng, which said Roger de Elyngham held it in 1401, by half a fee, of John Copledick, Knt. who held it of the Lady Roos, she of Thomas Mowbray, and he in capite of the King. How it went from the Elynghams I do not know, but imagine it must be by female heiresses; for in 1521, Humphry Wyngfield had a moiety of it, and John Aldham had another part; he died in 1558, and was buried in this chancel, leaving his part to John his son, (fn. 18) who held it jointly with Bonaventure Shardelowe, in 1571; Mr. Aldham had a fourth part of the manor, and a third turn, and Mr. Shardelow three parts and two turns. The patronage and manor was in Mr. John Motte, who was buried October 7, 1640, and John Motte, and his brother James, presented in 1649. It looks as if the Mottes had Aldham's part, and after purchased Shardelow's of Mr. John Shardelowe, who held it till 1611, together with Dalling manor in Florden, which was held of Shimpling manor. He conveyed it to Edmund Skipwith, Esq. and Antony Barry, Gent. and they to Thomas Wales, and John Basely, Gent. who conveyed it to the Motts, from whom, I am apt to think, it came to the Proctors, for John Buxton of St. Margaret's in South Elmham had it, in right of his wife, who was kinswoman and heiress of Mr. Proctor, rector of Gissing; after this it came to Robert Buxton, Esq. who died and left it to Elizabeth his wife, who is since dead, and Elizabeth Buxton, their only daughter, a minor, is now [1736] lady and patroness.

 

The Leet belongs to the manor, and the fine is at the lord's will.

 

As to the other parts of this village, (fn. 19) they being parts of the manors of Titshall, Fersfield, and Brisingham, it is sufficient to observe, that they went with those manors, except that part held by Fulco, of which the register called Pinchbek, fo. 182, says that Fulco or Fulcher held of the Abbot in Simplingaham and Gissing, 70 acres, and 4 borderers, being infeoffed by Abbot Baldwin in the time of the Conqueror; this, about Edward the First's time, was in Sir John Shardelowe, a judge in that King's reign, in whose family it continued till 1630, when it was sold to Mr. Mott. The seat of the Shardelows is now called the Place, and is the estate of the Duke of Grafton; and (as I am informed) formerly belonged to Isaac Pennington, (fn. 20) alderman of London, one of those rebels that sat as judges at the King's trial, for which villainy he was knighted. He lived to the Restoration, when, according to his deserts, his estates were seized as forfeited to King Charles II. who gave this to the Duke of Grafton; upon the forfeiture, the copyhold on the different manors were also seized, which is the reason that the quitrents to Gissing, Titshall, &c. are so large, they being made so when the Lords regranted them.

 

¶I have seen an ancient deed made by John Camerarius, or Chambers, of Shimpling, to Richard de Kentwell, clerk, and Alice his wife, and their heirs, of 3 acres of land in this town, witnessed by Sir Gerard de Wachesam, Knt. and others, which is remarkable, for its never having any seal, and its being dated at Shimpling in the churchyard, on Sunday next before Pentecost, anno 1294. (fn. 21) This shews us that seals (as Lambard justly observes (fn. 22) ) were not in common use at this time; and, therefore, to make a conveyance the most solemn and publick that could be, the deed was read to the parish, after service, in the churchyard, that all might know it, and be witnesses, if occasion required. The Saxons used no seals, only signed the mark of a cross to their instruments, to which the scribe affixed their names, by which they had a double meaning; first, to denote their being Christians, and then, as such, to confirm it by the symbol of their faith. The first sealed charter we meet with is that of Edward the Confessor to Westminster abbey, which use he brought with him from Normandy, where he was brought up; and for that reason it was approved of by the Norman Conqueror; though sealing grew into common use by degrees, the King at first only using it, then some of the nobility, after that the nobles in general, who engraved on their seals their own effigies covered with their coat armour; after this, the gentlemen followed, and used the arms of their family for difference sake. But about the time of Edward III. seals became of general use, and they that had no coat armour, sealed with their own device, as flowers, birds, beasts, or whatever they chiefly delighted in, as a dog, a hare, &c.; and nothing was more common than an invention or rebus for their names, as a swan and a tun for Swanton, a hare for Hare, &c.; and because very few of the commonality could write, (all learning at that time being among the religious only,) the person's name was usually circumscribed on his seal, so that at once they set both their name and seal, which was so sacred a thing in those days, that one man never used another's seal, without its being particularly taken notice of in the instrument sealed, and for this reason, every one carried their seal about them, either on their rings, or on a roundel fastened sometimes to their purse, sometimes to their girdle; nay, oftentimes where a man's seal was not much known, he procured some one in publick office to affix theirs, for the greater confirmation: thus Hugh de Schalers, (or Scales,) a younger son of the Lord Scales's family, parson of Harlton in Cambridgeshire, upon his agreeing to pay the Prior of Bernewell 30s. for the two third parts of the tithe corn due to the said Prior out of several lands in his parish, because his seal was known to few, he procured the archdeacon's official to put his seal of office, for more ample confirmation: (fn. 23) and when this was not done, nothing was more common than for a publick notary to affix his mark, which being registered at their admission into their office, was of as publick a nature as any seal could be, and of as great sanction to any instrument, those officers being always sworn to the true execution of their office, and to affix no other mark, than that they had registered, to any instrument; so their testimony could be as well known by their mark, as by their name; for which reason they were called Publick Notaries, Nota in Latin signifying a mark, and Publick because their mark was publickly registered, and their office was to be publick to all that had any occasion for them to strengthen their evidence. There are few of these officers among us now, and such as we have, have so far varied from the original of their name, that they use no mark at all, only add N. P. for Notary Publick, at the end of their names. Thus also the use of seals is now laid aside, I mean the true use of them, as the distinguishing mark of one family from another, and of one branch from another; and was it enjomed by publick authority, that every one in office should, upon his admission, choose and appropriate to himself a particular seal, and register a copy of it publickly, and should never use any other but that alone, under a severe penalty, I am apt to think, in a short time we should see the good effects of it; (fn. 24) for a great number of those vagabonds that infest our country under pretence of certificates signed by proper magistrates, (whose hands are oftener counterfeit than real,) would be detected; for though it is easy for an ill-designing person to forge a handwriting, it is directly the contrary as to a seal; and though it is in the power of all to know the magistrates names, it is but very few of such sort of people that could know their seals; so that it would in a great measure (if not altogether) put a stop to that vile practice; and it would be easy for every magistrate to know the seals of all others, if they were entered properly, engraved, and published: and it might be of service, if all the office seals in England (or in those foreign parts that any way concern the realm) were engraved and published, for then it would be in every one's power to know whether the seals of office affixed to all passes, &c. were genuine or no; for it is well known that numbers travel this nation, under pretence of passes from our consuls and agents abroad, and sometimes even deceive careful magistrates with the pretended hands and seals of such, it being sometimes impossible for them to know the truth, which by this means would evidently appear. And thus much, and a great deal more, may be said to encourage the true and original use of that wise Conqueror's practice, who can scarce be said to put any thing into use but what he found was of advantage to his government.

 

This rectory is in Norfolk archdeaconry, and Redenhall deanery: it had 69 communicants in 1603, and hath now [1736] 23 houses, and about 130 inhabitants. The town is valued at 300l. per annum. (fn. 25) Here are 3 acres of town land, one piece is a small pightle abutting on the land of Robert Leman, Esq. another piece is called Susan's pightle, lying in Gissing, and was given by a woman of this name, to repair the church porch, (as I am informed,) the other piece lies in Diss Heywode, and pays an annual rent of 5s.

 

The Commons are Kett's Fen, which contains about 4 acres; Pound Green, 1 acre; Hall Green, 4 acres; the Bottom, 6 acres; and the Lower Green, 6 acres.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol1...

+++ 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 Grumman Mohawk began as a joint Army-Marine program through the then-Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer), for an observation/attack plane that would outperform the light and vulnerable Cessna L-19 Bird Dog. In June 1956, the Army issued Type Specification TS145, which called for the development and procurement of a two-seat, twin turboprop aircraft designed to operate from small, unimproved fields under all weather conditions. It would be faster, with greater firepower, and heavier armor than the Bird Dog, which had proved very vulnerable during the Korean War.

 

The Mohawk's mission would include observation, artillery spotting, air control, emergency resupply, naval target spotting, liaison, and radiological monitoring. The Navy specified that the aircraft had to be capable of operating from small "jeep" escort class carriers (CVEs). The DoD selected Grumman Aircraft Corporation's G-134 design as the winner of the competition in 1957. Marine requirements contributed an unusual feature to the design: since the Marines were authorized to operate fixed-wing aircraft in the close air support (CAS) role, the mockup featured underwing pylons for rockets, bombs, and other stores, and this caused a lot of discord. The Air Force did not like the armament capability of the Mohawk and tried to get it removed. On the other side, the Marines did not want the sophisticated sensors the Army wanted, so when their Navy sponsors opted to buy a fleet oil tanker, they eventually dropped from the program altogether. The Army continued with armed Mohawks (and the resulting competence controversy with the Air Force) and also developed cargo pods that could be dropped from underwing hard points to resupply troops in emergencies.

 

In mid-1961, the first Mohawks to serve with U.S. forces overseas were delivered to the 7th Army at Sandhofen Airfield near Mannheim, Germany. Before its formal acceptance, the camera-carrying AO-1AF was flown on a tour of 29 European airfields to display it to the U.S. Army field commanders and potential European customers. In addition to their Vietnam and European service, SLAR-equipped Mohawks began operational missions in 1963 patrolling the Korean Demilitarized Zone.

 

Germany and France showed early interest in the Mohawk, and two OV-1s were field-tested by both nations over the course of several months. No direct orders resulted, though, but the German Bundesheer (Army) was impressed by the type’s performance and its capability as an observation and reconnaissance platform. Grumman even signed a license production agreement with the French manufacturer Breguet Aviation in exchange for American rights to the Atlantic maritime patrol aircraft, but no production orders followed.

 

This could have been the end of the OV-1 in Europe, but in 1977 the German government, primarily the interior ministry and its intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), showed interest in a light and agile SIGINT/ELINT platform that could fly surveillance missions along the inner-German border to the GDR and also to Czechoslovakia. Beyond visual reconnaissance with cameras and IR sensors, the aircraft was to be specifically able to identify and locate secret radio stations that were frequently operated by Eastern Block agents (esp. by the GDR) all across Western Germany, but primarily close to the inner-German border due to the clandestine stations’ low power. The Bundeswehr already operated a small ELINT/ECM fleet, consisting of converted HFB 320 ‘Hansa’ business jets, but these were not suited for stealthy and inconspicuous low flight level missions that were envisioned, and they also lacked the ability to fly slowly enough to locate potential “radio nests”.

 

The pan and the objective were clear, but the ELINT project caused a long and severe political debate concerning the operator of such an aerial platform. Initially, the Bundesheer, who had already tested the OV-1, claimed responsibility, but the interior ministry in the form of the German customs department as well as the German police’s Federal Border Guard, the Bundesgrenzschutz and the Luftwaffe (the proper operator for fixed-wing aircraft within the German armed forces), wrestled for this competence. Internally, the debate and the project ran under the handle “Schimmelreiter” (literally “The Rider on the White Horse”), after a northern German legendary figure, which eventually became the ELINT system’s semi-official name after it had been revealed to the public. After much tossing, in 1979 the decision was made to procure five refurbished U.S. Army OV-1As, tailored to the German needs and – after long internal debates – operate them by the Luftwaffe.

 

The former American aircraft were hybrids: they still had the OV-1A’s original short wings, but already the OV-1D’s stronger engines and its internal pallet system for interchangeable electronics. The machines received the designation OV-1G (for Germany) and were delivered in early 1980 via ship without any sensors or cameras. These were of Western German origin, developed and fitted locally, tailored to the special border surveillance needs.

 

The installation and testing of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite lasted until 1982. It was based on a Raytheon TI Systems emitter locator system, but it was locally adapted by AEG-Telefunken to the airframe and the Bundeswehr’s special tasks and needs. The system’s hardware was stowed in the fuselage, its sensor arrays were mounted into a pair of underwing nacelles, which occupied the OV-1’s standard hardpoints, allowing a full 360° coverage. In order to cool the electronics suite and regulate the climate in the internal equipment bays, the OV-1G received a powerful heat exchanger, mounted under a wedge-shaped fairing on the spine in front of the tail – the most obvious difference of this type from its American brethren. The exact specifications of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite remained classified, but special emphasis was placed upon COMINT (Communications Intelligence), a sub-category of signals intelligence that engages in dealing with messages or voice information derived from the interception of foreign communications. Even though the “Schimmelreiter” suite was the OV-1Gs’ primary reconnaissance tool, the whole system could be quickly de-installed for other sensor packs and reconnaissance tasks (even though this never happened), or augmented by single modules, what made upgrades and mission specialization easy. Beyond the ELINT suite, the OV-1G could be outfitted with cameras and other sensors on exchangeable pallets in the fuselage, too. This typically included a panoramic camera in a wedge-shaped ventral fairing, which would visually document the emitter sensors’ recordings.

 

A special feature of the German OV-1s was the integration of a brand new, NATO-compatible “Link-16” data link system via a MIDS-LVT (Multifunctional Information Distribution System). Even though this later became a standard for military systems, the OV-1G broke the ground for this innovative technology. The MIDS was an advanced command, control, communications, computing and intelligence (C4I) system incorporating high-capacity, jam-resistant, digital communication links for exchange of near real-time tactical information, including both data and voice, among air, ground, and sea elements. Outwardly, the MIDS was only recognizable through a shallow antenna blister behind the cockpit.

 

Even though the OV-1Gs initially retained their former American uniform olive drab livery upon delivery and outfitting in German service, they soon received a new wraparound camouflage for their dedicated low-level role in green and black (Luftwaffe Norm 83 standard), which was better suited for the European theatre of operations. In Luftwaffe service, the OV-1Gs received the tactical codes 18+01-05 and the small fleet was allocated to the Aufklärungsgeschwader (AG) 51 “Immelmann”, where the machines formed, beyond two squadrons with RF-4E Phantom IIs, an independent 3rd squadron. This small unit was from the start based as a detachment at Lechfeld, located in Bavaria/Southern Germany, instead of AG 51’s home airbase Bremgarten in South-Western Germany, because Lechfeld was closer to the type’s typical theatre of operations along Western Germany’s Eastern borders. Another factor in favor of this different airbase was the fact that Lechfeld was, beyond Tornado IDS fighter bombers, also the home of the Luftwaffe’s seven HFB 320M ECM aircraft, operated by the JaBoG32’s 3rd squadron, so that the local maintenance crews were familiar with complex electronics and aircraft systems, and the base’s security level was appropriate, too.

 

With the end of the Cold War in 1990, the OV-1Gs role and field of operation gradually shifted further eastwards. With the inner-German Iron Curtain gone, the machines were now frequently operated along the Polish and Czech Republic border, as well as in international airspace over the Baltic Sea, monitoring the radar activities along the coastlines and esp. the activities of Russian Navy ships that operated from Kaliningrad and Saint Petersburg. For these missions, the machines were frequently deployed to the “new” air bases Laage and Holzdorf in Eastern Germany.

 

In American service, the OV-1s were retired from Europe in 1992 and from operational U.S. Army service in 1996. In Germany, the OV-1 was kept in service for a considerably longer time – with little problems, since the OV-1 airframes had relatively few flying hours on their clocks. The Luftwaffe’s service level for the aircraft was high and spare parts remained easy to obtain from the USA, and there were still OV-1 parts in USAF storage in Western German bases.

 

The German HFB 320M fleet was retired between 1993 and 1994 and, in part, replaced by the Tornado ECR. At the same time AG 51 was dissolved and the OV-1Gs were nominally re-allocated to JaboG 32/3. With this unit the OV-1Gs remained operational until 2010, undergoing constant updates and equipment changes. For instance, the machines received in 1995 a powerful FLIR sensor in a small turret in the aircraft’s nose, which improved the aircraft’s all-weather reconnaissance capabilities and was intended to spot hidden radio posts even under all-weather/night conditions, once their signal was recognized and located. The aircrafts’ radio emitter locator system was updated several times, too, and, as a passive defensive measure against heat-guided air-to-air missiles/MANPADS, an IR jammer was added, extending the fuselage beyond the tail. These machines received the suffix “Phase II”, even though all five aircraft were updated the same way.

Reports that the OV-1Gs were furthermore retrofitted with the avionics to mount and launch AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs under the wing tips for self-defense remained unconfirmed, even more so because no aircraft was ever seen carrying arms – neither the AIM-9 nor anything else. Plans to make the OV-1Gs capable of carrying the Luftwaffe’s AGM-65 Maverick never went beyond the drawing board, either. However, BOZ chaff/flare dispenser pods and Cerberus ECM pods were occasionally seen on the ventral pylons from 1998 onwards.

 

No OV-1G was lost during the type’s career in Luftwaffe service, and after the end of the airframes’ service life, all five German OV-1Gs were scrapped in 2011. There was, due to worsening budget restraints, no direct successor, even though the maritime surveillance duties were taken over by Dornier Do 228/NGs operated by the German Marineflieger (naval air arm).

  

General characteristics:

Crew: Two: pilot, observer/systems operator

Length: 44 ft 4 in (13.53 m) overall with FLIR sensor and IR jammer

Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.8 m)

Height: 12 ft 8 in (3.86 m)

Wing area: 330 sq. ft (30.65 m²)

Empty weight: 12,054 lb (5,467 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,544 lb (7,051 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,109 lb (8,214 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Lycoming T53-L-701 turboprops, 1,400 shp (1,044 kW) each

 

Performance:

Never exceed speed: 450 mph (390 knots, 724 km/h)

Maximum speed: 305 mph (265 knots, 491 km/h) at 10,000 ft (3,050 m)

Cruise speed: 207 mph (180 knots, 334 km/h) (econ cruise)

Stall speed: 84 mph (73 knots, 135 km/h)

Range: 944 mi (820 nmi, 1,520 km) (SLAR mission)

Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Rate of climb: 3,450 ft/min (17.5 m/s)

 

Armament:

A total of eight external hardpoints (two ventral, three under each outer wing)

for external loads; the wing hardpoints were typically occupied with ELINT sensor pods, while the

ventral hardpoints frequently carried 300 l drop tanks to extend loiter time and range;

Typically, no offensive armament was carried, even though bombs or gun/missile pods were possible.

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build became a submission to the “Reconnaissance” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com in July 2021, and it spins further real-world events. Germany actually tested two OV-1s in the Sixties (by the German Army/Bundesheer, not by the air force), but the type was not procured or operated. The test aircraft carried a glossy, olive drab livery (US standard, I think) with German national markings.

However, having a vintage Hasegawa OV-1A in the stash, I wondered what an operational German OV-1 might have looked like, especially if it had been operated into the Eighties and beyond, in the contemporary Norm 83 paint scheme? This led to this purely fictional OV-1G.

 

The kit was mostly built OOB, and the building experience was rather so-so – after all, it’s a pretty old mold/boxing (in my case the Hasegawa/Hales kit is from 1978, the mold is from 1968!). Just a few things were modified/added in order to tweak the standard, short-winged OV-1A into something more modern and sophisticated.

 

When searching for a solution to mount some ELINT sensor arrays, I did not want to copy the OV-1B’s characteristic offset, ventral SLAR fairing. I rather settled for the late RV-1D’s solution with sensor pods under the outer wings. Unfortunately, the OV-1A kit came with the type’s original short wings, so that the pods had to occupy the inner underwing pair of hardpoints. The pods were scratched from square styrene profiles and putty, so that they received a unique look. The Mohawk’s pair of ventral hardpoints were mounted, but – after considering some drop tanks or an ECM pod there - left empty, so that the field of view for the ventral panoramic camera would not be obscured.

 

Other small additions are some radar warning sensor bumps on the nose, some extra antennae, a shallow bulge for the MIDS antenna on the spine, the FLIR turret on the nose (with parts from an Italeri AH-1 and a Kangnam Yak-38!), and I added a tail stinger for a retrofitted (scratched) IR decoy device, inspired by the American AN/ALG-147. This once was a Matchbox SNEB unguided missile pod.

  

Painting and markings:

For the intended era, the German Norm 83 paint scheme, which is still in use today on several Luftwaffe types like the Transall, PAH-2 or CH-53, appeared like a natural choice. It’s a tri-color wraparound scheme, consisting of RAL 6003 (Olivgrün), FS 34097 (Forest Green) and RAL 7021 (Teerschwarz). The paints I used are Humbrol 86 (which is supposed to be a WWI version of RAL 6003, it lacks IMHO yellow but has good contrast to the other tones), Humbrol 116 and Revell 9. The pattern itself was adapted from the German Luftwaffe’s Dornier Do 28D “Skyservants” with Norm 83 camouflage, because of the type’s similar outlines.

 

A black ink washing was applied for light weathering, plus some post-shading of panels with lighter shades of the basic camouflage tones for a more plastic look. The cockpit interior was painted in light grey (Humbrol 167), while the landing gear and the interior of the air brakes became white. The scratched SLAR pods became light grey, with flat di-electric panels in medium grey (created with decal material).

The cockpit interior was painted in a rather light grey (Humbrol 167), the pilots received typical olive drab Luftwaffe overalls, one with a white “bone dome” and the other with a more modern light grey helmet.

 

The decals were improvised. National markings and tactical codes came from TL Modellbau sheets, the AG 51 emblems were taken from a Hasegawa RF-4E sheet. The black walkways were taken from the Mohak’s OOB sheet, the black de-icer leading edges on wings and tail were created with generic black decal material. Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

An interesting result, and the hybrid paint scheme with the additional desert camouflage really makes the aircraft an unusual sight, adding to its credibility.

Colosseum

Following, a text, in english, from the Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia:

The Colosseum, or the Coliseum, originally the Flavian Amphitheatre (Latin: Amphitheatrum Flavium, Italian Anfiteatro Flavio or Colosseo), is an elliptical amphitheatre in the centre of the city of Rome, Italy, the largest ever built in the Roman Empire. It is considered one of the greatest works of Roman architecture and Roman engineering.

Occupying a site just east of the Roman Forum, its construction started between 70 and 72 AD[1] under the emperor Vespasian and was completed in 80 AD under Titus,[2] with further modifications being made during Domitian's reign (81–96).[3] The name "Amphitheatrum Flavium" derives from both Vespasian's and Titus's family name (Flavius, from the gens Flavia).

Capable of seating 50,000 spectators,[1][4][5] the Colosseum was used for gladiatorial contests and public spectacles such as mock sea battles, animal hunts, executions, re-enactments of famous battles, and dramas based on Classical mythology. The building ceased to be used for entertainment in the early medieval era. It was later reused for such purposes as housing, workshops, quarters for a religious order, a fortress, a quarry, and a Christian shrine.

Although in the 21st century it stays partially ruined because of damage caused by devastating earthquakes and stone-robbers, the Colosseum is an iconic symbol of Imperial Rome. It is one of Rome's most popular tourist attractions and still has close connections with the Roman Catholic Church, as each Good Friday the Pope leads a torchlit "Way of the Cross" procession that starts in the area around the Colosseum.[6]

The Colosseum is also depicted on the Italian version of the five-cent euro coin.

The Colosseum's original Latin name was Amphitheatrum Flavium, often anglicized as Flavian Amphitheater. The building was constructed by emperors of the Flavian dynasty, hence its original name, after the reign of Emperor Nero.[7] This name is still used in modern English, but generally the structure is better known as the Colosseum. In antiquity, Romans may have referred to the Colosseum by the unofficial name Amphitheatrum Caesareum; this name could have been strictly poetic.[8][9] This name was not exclusive to the Colosseum; Vespasian and Titus, builders of the Colosseum, also constructed an amphitheater of the same name in Puteoli (modern Pozzuoli).[10]

The name Colosseum has long been believed to be derived from a colossal statue of Nero nearby.[3] (the statue of Nero itself being named after one of the original ancient wonders, the Colossus of Rhodes[citation needed]. This statue was later remodeled by Nero's successors into the likeness of Helios (Sol) or Apollo, the sun god, by adding the appropriate solar crown. Nero's head was also replaced several times with the heads of succeeding emperors. Despite its pagan links, the statue remained standing well into the medieval era and was credited with magical powers. It came to be seen as an iconic symbol of the permanence of Rome.

In the 8th century, a famous epigram attributed to the Venerable Bede celebrated the symbolic significance of the statue in a prophecy that is variously quoted: Quamdiu stat Colisæus, stat et Roma; quando cadet colisæus, cadet et Roma; quando cadet Roma, cadet et mundus ("as long as the Colossus stands, so shall Rome; when the Colossus falls, Rome shall fall; when Rome falls, so falls the world").[11] This is often mistranslated to refer to the Colosseum rather than the Colossus (as in, for instance, Byron's poem Childe Harold's Pilgrimage). However, at the time that the Pseudo-Bede wrote, the masculine noun coliseus was applied to the statue rather than to what was still known as the Flavian amphitheatre.

The Colossus did eventually fall, possibly being pulled down to reuse its bronze. By the year 1000 the name "Colosseum" had been coined to refer to the amphitheatre. The statue itself was largely forgotten and only its base survives, situated between the Colosseum and the nearby Temple of Venus and Roma.[12]

The name further evolved to Coliseum during the Middle Ages. In Italy, the amphitheatre is still known as il Colosseo, and other Romance languages have come to use similar forms such as le Colisée (French), el Coliseo (Spanish) and o Coliseu (Portuguese).

Construction of the Colosseum began under the rule of the Emperor Vespasian[3] in around 70–72AD. The site chosen was a flat area on the floor of a low valley between the Caelian, Esquiline and Palatine Hills, through which a canalised stream ran. By the 2nd century BC the area was densely inhabited. It was devastated by the Great Fire of Rome in AD 64, following which Nero seized much of the area to add to his personal domain. He built the grandiose Domus Aurea on the site, in front of which he created an artificial lake surrounded by pavilions, gardens and porticoes. The existing Aqua Claudia aqueduct was extended to supply water to the area and the gigantic bronze Colossus of Nero was set up nearby at the entrance to the Domus Aurea.[12]

Although the Colossus was preserved, much of the Domus Aurea was torn down. The lake was filled in and the land reused as the location for the new Flavian Amphitheatre. Gladiatorial schools and other support buildings were constructed nearby within the former grounds of the Domus Aurea. According to a reconstructed inscription found on the site, "the emperor Vespasian ordered this new amphitheatre to be erected from his general's share of the booty." This is thought to refer to the vast quantity of treasure seized by the Romans following their victory in the Great Jewish Revolt in 70AD. The Colosseum can be thus interpreted as a great triumphal monument built in the Roman tradition of celebrating great victories[12], placating the Roman people instead of returning soldiers. Vespasian's decision to build the Colosseum on the site of Nero's lake can also be seen as a populist gesture of returning to the people an area of the city which Nero had appropriated for his own use. In contrast to many other amphitheatres, which were located on the outskirts of a city, the Colosseum was constructed in the city centre; in effect, placing it both literally and symbolically at the heart of Rome.

The Colosseum had been completed up to the third story by the time of Vespasian's death in 79. The top level was finished and the building inaugurated by his son, Titus, in 80.[3] Dio Cassius recounts that over 9,000 wild animals were killed during the inaugural games of the amphitheatre. The building was remodelled further under Vespasian's younger son, the newly designated Emperor Domitian, who constructed the hypogeum, a series of underground tunnels used to house animals and slaves. He also added a gallery to the top of the Colosseum to increase its seating capacity.

In 217, the Colosseum was badly damaged by a major fire (caused by lightning, according to Dio Cassius[13]) which destroyed the wooden upper levels of the amphitheatre's interior. It was not fully repaired until about 240 and underwent further repairs in 250 or 252 and again in 320. An inscription records the restoration of various parts of the Colosseum under Theodosius II and Valentinian III (reigned 425–455), possibly to repair damage caused by a major earthquake in 443; more work followed in 484[14] and 508. The arena continued to be used for contests well into the 6th century, with gladiatorial fights last mentioned around 435. Animal hunts continued until at least 523, when Anicius Maximus celebrated his consulship with some venationes, criticised by King Theodoric the Great for their high cost.

The Colosseum underwent several radical changes of use during the medieval period. By the late 6th century a small church had been built into the structure of the amphitheatre, though this apparently did not confer any particular religious significance on the building as a whole. The arena was converted into a cemetery. The numerous vaulted spaces in the arcades under the seating were converted into housing and workshops, and are recorded as still being rented out as late as the 12th century. Around 1200 the Frangipani family took over the Colosseum and fortified it, apparently using it as a castle.

Severe damage was inflicted on the Colosseum by the great earthquake in 1349, causing the outer south side, lying on a less stable alluvional terrain, to collapse. Much of the tumbled stone was reused to build palaces, churches, hospitals and other buildings elsewhere in Rome. A religious order moved into the northern third of the Colosseum in the mid-14th century and continued to inhabit it until as late as the early 19th century. The interior of the amphitheatre was extensively stripped of stone, which was reused elsewhere, or (in the case of the marble façade) was burned to make quicklime.[12] The bronze clamps which held the stonework together were pried or hacked out of the walls, leaving numerous pockmarks which still scar the building today.

During the 16th and 17th century, Church officials sought a productive role for the vast derelict hulk of the Colosseum. Pope Sixtus V (1585–1590) planned to turn the building into a wool factory to provide employment for Rome's prostitutes, though this proposal fell through with his premature death.[15] In 1671 Cardinal Altieri authorized its use for bullfights; a public outcry caused the idea to be hastily abandoned.

In 1749, Pope Benedict XIV endorsed as official Church policy the view that the Colosseum was a sacred site where early Christians had been martyred. He forbade the use of the Colosseum as a quarry and consecrated the building to the Passion of Christ and installed Stations of the Cross, declaring it sanctified by the blood of the Christian martyrs who perished there (see Christians and the Colosseum). However there is no historical evidence to support Benedict's claim, nor is there even any evidence that anyone prior to the 16th century suggested this might be the case; the Catholic Encyclopedia concludes that there are no historical grounds for the supposition. Later popes initiated various stabilization and restoration projects, removing the extensive vegetation which had overgrown the structure and threatened to damage it further. The façade was reinforced with triangular brick wedges in 1807 and 1827, and the interior was repaired in 1831, 1846 and in the 1930s. The arena substructure was partly excavated in 1810–1814 and 1874 and was fully exposed under Benito Mussolini in the 1930s.

The Colosseum is today one of Rome's most popular tourist attractions, receiving millions of visitors annually. The effects of pollution and general deterioration over time prompted a major restoration programme carried out between 1993 and 2000, at a cost of 40 billion Italian lire ($19.3m / €20.6m at 2000 prices). In recent years it has become a symbol of the international campaign against capital punishment, which was abolished in Italy in 1948. Several anti–death penalty demonstrations took place in front of the Colosseum in 2000. Since that time, as a gesture against the death penalty, the local authorities of Rome change the color of the Colosseum's night time illumination from white to gold whenever a person condemned to the death penalty anywhere in the world gets their sentence commuted or is released,[16] or if a jurisdiction abolishes the death penalty. Most recently, the Colosseum was illuminated in gold when capital punishment was abolished in the American state of New Mexico in April 2009.

Because of the ruined state of the interior, it is impractical to use the Colosseum to host large events; only a few hundred spectators can be accommodated in temporary seating. However, much larger concerts have been held just outside, using the Colosseum as a backdrop. Performers who have played at the Colosseum in recent years have included Ray Charles (May 2002),[18] Paul McCartney (May 2003),[19] Elton John (September 2005),[20] and Billy Joel (July 2006).

Exterior

Unlike earlier Greek theatres that were built into hillsides, the Colosseum is an entirely free-standing structure. It derives its basic exterior and interior architecture from that of two Roman theatres back to back. It is elliptical in plan and is 189 meters (615 ft / 640 Roman feet) long, and 156 meters (510 ft / 528 Roman feet) wide, with a base area of 6 acres (24,000 m2). The height of the outer wall is 48 meters (157 ft / 165 Roman feet). The perimeter originally measured 545 meters (1,788 ft / 1,835 Roman feet). The central arena is an oval 87 m (287 ft) long and 55 m (180 ft) wide, surrounded by a wall 5 m (15 ft) high, above which rose tiers of seating.

The outer wall is estimated to have required over 100,000 cubic meters (131,000 cu yd) of travertine stone which were set without mortar held together by 300 tons of iron clamps.[12] However, it has suffered extensive damage over the centuries, with large segments having collapsed following earthquakes. The north side of the perimeter wall is still standing; the distinctive triangular brick wedges at each end are modern additions, having been constructed in the early 19th century to shore up the wall. The remainder of the present-day exterior of the Colosseum is in fact the original interior wall.

The surviving part of the outer wall's monumental façade comprises three stories of superimposed arcades surmounted by a podium on which stands a tall attic, both of which are pierced by windows interspersed at regular intervals. The arcades are framed by half-columns of the Tuscan, Ionic, and Corinthian orders, while the attic is decorated with Corinthian pilasters.[21] Each of the arches in the second- and third-floor arcades framed statues, probably honoring divinities and other figures from Classical mythology.

Two hundred and forty mast corbels were positioned around the top of the attic. They originally supported a retractable awning, known as the velarium, that kept the sun and rain off spectators. This consisted of a canvas-covered, net-like structure made of ropes, with a hole in the center.[3] It covered two-thirds of the arena, and sloped down towards the center to catch the wind and provide a breeze for the audience. Sailors, specially enlisted from the Roman naval headquarters at Misenum and housed in the nearby Castra Misenatium, were used to work the velarium.[22]

The Colosseum's huge crowd capacity made it essential that the venue could be filled or evacuated quickly. Its architects adopted solutions very similar to those used in modern stadiums to deal with the same problem. The amphitheatre was ringed by eighty entrances at ground level, 76 of which were used by ordinary spectators.[3] Each entrance and exit was numbered, as was each staircase. The northern main entrance was reserved for the Roman Emperor and his aides, whilst the other three axial entrances were most likely used by the elite. All four axial entrances were richly decorated with painted stucco reliefs, of which fragments survive. Many of the original outer entrances have disappeared with the collapse of the perimeter wall, but entrances XXIII (23) to LIV (54) still survive.[12]

Spectators were given tickets in the form of numbered pottery shards, which directed them to the appropriate section and row. They accessed their seats via vomitoria (singular vomitorium), passageways that opened into a tier of seats from below or behind. These quickly dispersed people into their seats and, upon conclusion of the event or in an emergency evacuation, could permit their exit within only a few minutes. The name vomitoria derived from the Latin word for a rapid discharge, from which English derives the word vomit.

Interior

According to the Codex-Calendar of 354, the Colosseum could accommodate 87,000 people, although modern estimates put the figure at around 50,000. They were seated in a tiered arrangement that reflected the rigidly stratified nature of Roman society. Special boxes were provided at the north and south ends respectively for the Emperor and the Vestal Virgins, providing the best views of the arena. Flanking them at the same level was a broad platform or podium for the senatorial class, who were allowed to bring their own chairs. The names of some 5th century senators can still be seen carved into the stonework, presumably reserving areas for their use.

The tier above the senators, known as the maenianum primum, was occupied by the non-senatorial noble class or knights (equites). The next level up, the maenianum secundum, was originally reserved for ordinary Roman citizens (plebians) and was divided into two sections. The lower part (the immum) was for wealthy citizens, while the upper part (the summum) was for poor citizens. Specific sectors were provided for other social groups: for instance, boys with their tutors, soldiers on leave, foreign dignitaries, scribes, heralds, priests and so on. Stone (and later marble) seating was provided for the citizens and nobles, who presumably would have brought their own cushions with them. Inscriptions identified the areas reserved for specific groups.

Another level, the maenianum secundum in legneis, was added at the very top of the building during the reign of Domitian. This comprised a gallery for the common poor, slaves and women. It would have been either standing room only, or would have had very steep wooden benches. Some groups were banned altogether from the Colosseum, notably gravediggers, actors and former gladiators.

Each tier was divided into sections (maeniana) by curved passages and low walls (praecinctiones or baltei), and were subdivided into cunei, or wedges, by the steps and aisles from the vomitoria. Each row (gradus) of seats was numbered, permitting each individual seat to be exactly designated by its gradus, cuneus, and number.

The arena itself was 83 meters by 48 meters (272 ft by 157 ft / 280 by 163 Roman feet).[12] It comprised a wooden floor covered by sand (the Latin word for sand is harena or arena), covering an elaborate underground structure called the hypogeum (literally meaning "underground"). Little now remains of the original arena floor, but the hypogeum is still clearly visible. It consisted of a two-level subterranean network of tunnels and cages beneath the arena where gladiators and animals were held before contests began. Eighty vertical shafts provided instant access to the arena for caged animals and scenery pieces concealed underneath; larger hinged platforms, called hegmata, provided access for elephants and the like. It was restructured on numerous occasions; at least twelve different phases of construction can be seen.[12]

The hypogeum was connected by underground tunnels to a number of points outside the Colosseum. Animals and performers were brought through the tunnel from nearby stables, with the gladiators' barracks at the Ludus Magnus to the east also being connected by tunnels. Separate tunnels were provided for the Emperor and the Vestal Virgins to permit them to enter and exit the Colosseum without needing to pass through the crowds.[12]

Substantial quantities of machinery also existed in the hypogeum. Elevators and pulleys raised and lowered scenery and props, as well as lifting caged animals to the surface for release. There is evidence for the existence of major hydraulic mechanisms[12] and according to ancient accounts, it was possible to flood the arena rapidly, presumably via a connection to a nearby aqueduct.

The Colosseum and its activities supported a substantial industry in the area. In addition to the amphitheatre itself, many other buildings nearby were linked to the games. Immediately to the east is the remains of the Ludus Magnus, a training school for gladiators. This was connected to the Colosseum by an underground passage, to allow easy access for the gladiators. The Ludus Magnus had its own miniature training arena, which was itself a popular attraction for Roman spectators. Other training schools were in the same area, including the Ludus Matutinus (Morning School), where fighters of animals were trained, plus the Dacian and Gallic Schools.

Also nearby were the Armamentarium, comprising an armory to store weapons; the Summum Choragium, where machinery was stored; the Sanitarium, which had facilities to treat wounded gladiators; and the Spoliarium, where bodies of dead gladiators were stripped of their armor and disposed of.

Around the perimeter of the Colosseum, at a distance of 18 m (59 ft) from the perimeter, was a series of tall stone posts, with five remaining on the eastern side. Various explanations have been advanced for their presence; they may have been a religious boundary, or an outer boundary for ticket checks, or an anchor for the velarium or awning.

Right next to the Colosseum is also the Arch of Constantine.

he Colosseum was used to host gladiatorial shows as well as a variety of other events. The shows, called munera, were always given by private individuals rather than the state. They had a strong religious element but were also demonstrations of power and family prestige, and were immensely popular with the population. Another popular type of show was the animal hunt, or venatio. This utilized a great variety of wild beasts, mainly imported from Africa and the Middle East, and included creatures such as rhinoceros, hippopotamuses, elephants, giraffes, aurochs, wisents, barbary lions, panthers, leopards, bears, caspian tigers, crocodiles and ostriches. Battles and hunts were often staged amid elaborate sets with movable trees and buildings. Such events were occasionally on a huge scale; Trajan is said to have celebrated his victories in Dacia in 107 with contests involving 11,000 animals and 10,000 gladiators over the course of 123 days.

During the early days of the Colosseum, ancient writers recorded that the building was used for naumachiae (more properly known as navalia proelia) or simulated sea battles. Accounts of the inaugural games held by Titus in AD 80 describe it being filled with water for a display of specially trained swimming horses and bulls. There is also an account of a re-enactment of a famous sea battle between the Corcyrean (Corfiot) Greeks and the Corinthians. This has been the subject of some debate among historians; although providing the water would not have been a problem, it is unclear how the arena could have been waterproofed, nor would there have been enough space in the arena for the warships to move around. It has been suggested that the reports either have the location wrong, or that the Colosseum originally featured a wide floodable channel down its central axis (which would later have been replaced by the hypogeum).[12]

Sylvae or recreations of natural scenes were also held in the arena. Painters, technicians and architects would construct a simulation of a forest with real trees and bushes planted in the arena's floor. Animals would be introduced to populate the scene for the delight of the crowd. Such scenes might be used simply to display a natural environment for the urban population, or could otherwise be used as the backdrop for hunts or dramas depicting episodes from mythology. They were also occasionally used for executions in which the hero of the story — played by a condemned person — was killed in one of various gruesome but mythologically authentic ways, such as being mauled by beasts or burned to death.

The Colosseum today is now a major tourist attraction in Rome with thousands of tourists each year paying to view the interior arena, though entrance for EU citizens is partially subsidised, and under-18 and over-65 EU citizens' entrances are free.[24] There is now a museum dedicated to Eros located in the upper floor of the outer wall of the building. Part of the arena floor has been re-floored. Beneath the Colosseum, a network of subterranean passageways once used to transport wild animals and gladiators to the arena opened to the public in summer 2010.[25]

The Colosseum is also the site of Roman Catholic ceremonies in the 20th and 21st centuries. For instance, Pope Benedict XVI leads the Stations of the Cross called the Scriptural Way of the Cross (which calls for more meditation) at the Colosseum[26][27] on Good Fridays.

In the Middle Ages, the Colosseum was clearly not regarded as a sacred site. Its use as a fortress and then a quarry demonstrates how little spiritual importance was attached to it, at a time when sites associated with martyrs were highly venerated. It was not included in the itineraries compiled for the use of pilgrims nor in works such as the 12th century Mirabilia Urbis Romae ("Marvels of the City of Rome"), which claims the Circus Flaminius — but not the Colosseum — as the site of martyrdoms. Part of the structure was inhabited by a Christian order, but apparently not for any particular religious reason.

It appears to have been only in the 16th and 17th centuries that the Colosseum came to be regarded as a Christian site. Pope Pius V (1566–1572) is said to have recommended that pilgrims gather sand from the arena of the Colosseum to serve as a relic, on the grounds that it was impregnated with the blood of martyrs. This seems to have been a minority view until it was popularised nearly a century later by Fioravante Martinelli, who listed the Colosseum at the head of a list of places sacred to the martyrs in his 1653 book Roma ex ethnica sacra.

Martinelli's book evidently had an effect on public opinion; in response to Cardinal Altieri's proposal some years later to turn the Colosseum into a bullring, Carlo Tomassi published a pamphlet in protest against what he regarded as an act of desecration. The ensuing controversy persuaded Pope Clement X to close the Colosseum's external arcades and declare it a sanctuary, though quarrying continued for some time.

At the instance of St. Leonard of Port Maurice, Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758) forbade the quarrying of the Colosseum and erected Stations of the Cross around the arena, which remained until February 1874. St. Benedict Joseph Labre spent the later years of his life within the walls of the Colosseum, living on alms, prior to his death in 1783. Several 19th century popes funded repair and restoration work on the Colosseum, and it still retains a Christian connection today. Crosses stand in several points around the arena and every Good Friday the Pope leads a Via Crucis procession to the amphitheatre.

 

Coliseu (Colosseo)

A seguir, um texto, em português, da Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre:

 

O Coliseu, também conhecido como Anfiteatro Flaviano, deve seu nome à expressão latina Colosseum (ou Coliseus, no latim tardio), devido à estátua colossal de Nero, que ficava perto a edificação. Localizado no centro de Roma, é uma excepção de entre os anfiteatros pelo seu volume e relevo arquitectónico. Originalmente capaz de albergar perto de 50 000 pessoas, e com 48 metros de altura, era usado para variados espetáculos. Foi construído a leste do fórum romano e demorou entre 8 a 10 anos a ser construído.

O Coliseu foi utilizado durante aproximadamente 500 anos, tendo sido o último registro efetuado no século VI da nossa era, bastante depois da queda de Roma em 476. O edifício deixou de ser usado para entretenimento no começo da era medieval, mas foi mais tarde usado como habitação, oficina, forte, pedreira, sede de ordens religiosas e templo cristão.

Embora esteja agora em ruínas devido a terremotos e pilhagens, o Coliseu sempre foi visto como símbolo do Império Romano, sendo um dos melhores exemplos da sua arquitectura. Actualmente é uma das maiores atrações turísticas em Roma e em 7 de julho de 2007 foi eleita umas das "Sete maravilhas do mundo moderno". Além disso, o Coliseu ainda tem ligações à igreja, com o Papa a liderar a procissão da Via Sacra até ao Coliseu todas as Sextas-feiras Santas.

O coliseu era um local onde seriam exibidos toda uma série de espectáculos, inseridos nos vários tipos de jogos realizados na urbe. Os combates entre gladiadores, chamados muneras, eram sempre pagos por pessoas individuais em busca de prestígio e poder em vez do estado. A arena (87,5 m por 55 m) possuía um piso de madeira, normalmente coberto de areia para absorver o sangue dos combates (certa vez foi colocada água na representação de uma batalha naval), sob o qual existia um nível subterrâneo com celas e jaulas que tinham acessos diretos para a arena; Alguns detalhes dessa construção, como a cobertura removível que poupava os espectadores do sol, são bastante interessantes, e mostram o refinamento atingido pelos construtores romanos. Formado por cinco anéis concêntricos de arcos e abóbadas, o Coliseu representa bem o avanço introduzido pelos romanos à engenharia de estruturas. Esses arcos são de concreto (de cimento natural) revestidos por alvenaria. Na verdade, a alvenaria era construída simultaneamente e já servia de forma para a concretagem. Outro tipo de espetáculos era a caça de animais, ou venatio, onde eram utilizados animais selvagens importados de África. Os animais mais utilizados eram os grandes felinos como leões, leopardos e panteras, mas animais como rinocerontes, hipopótamos, elefantes, girafas, crocodilos e avestruzes eram também utilizados. As caçadas, tal como as representações de batalhas famosas, eram efetuadas em elaborados cenários onde constavam árvores e edifícios amovíveis.

Estas últimas eram por vezes representadas numa escala gigante; Trajano celebrou a sua vitória em Dácia no ano 107 com concursos envolvendo 11 000 animais e 10 000 gladiadores no decorrer de 123 dias.

Segundo o documentário produzido pelo canal televisivo fechado, History Channel, o Coliseu também era utilizado para a realização de naumaquias, ou batalhas navais. O coliseu era inundado por dutos subterrâneos alimentados pelos aquedutos que traziam água de longe. Passada esta fase, foi construída uma estrutura, que é a que podemos ver hoje nas ruínas do Coliseu, com altura de um prédio de dois andares, onde no passado se concentravam os gladiadores, feras e todo o pessoal que organizava os duelos que ocorreriam na arena. A arena era como um grande palco, feito de madeira, e se chama arena, que em italiano significa areia, porque era jogada areia sob a estrutura de madeira para esconder as imperfeições. Os animais podiam ser inseridos nos duelos a qualquer momento por um esquema de elevadores que surgiam em alguns pontos da arena; o filme "Gladiador" retrata muito bem esta questão dos elevadores. Os estudiosos, há pouco tempo, descobriram uma rede de dutos inundados por baixo da arena do Coliseu. Acredita-se que o Coliseu foi construído onde, outrora, foi o lago do Palácio Dourado de Nero; O imperador Vespasiano escolheu o local da construção para que o mal causado por Nero fosse esquecido por uma construção gloriosa.

Sylvae, ou recreações de cenas naturais eram também realizadas no Coliseu. Pintores, técnicos e arquitectos construiriam simulações de florestas com árvores e arbustos reais plantados no chão da arena. Animais seriam então introduzidos para dar vida à simulação. Esses cenários podiam servir só para agrado do público ou como pano de fundo para caçadas ou dramas representando episódios da mitologia romana, tão autênticos quanto possível, ao ponto de pessoas condenadas fazerem o papel de heróis onde eram mortos de maneiras horríveis mas mitologicamente autênticas, como mutilados por animais ou queimados vivos.

Embora o Coliseu tenha funcionado até ao século VI da nossa Era, foram proibidos os jogos com mortes humanas desde 404, sendo apenas massacrados animais como elefantes, panteras ou leões.

O Coliseu era sobretudo um enorme instrumento de propaganda e difusão da filosofia de toda uma civilização, e tal como era já profetizado pelo monge e historiador inglês Beda na sua obra do século VII "De temporibus liber": "Enquanto o Coliseu se mantiver de pé, Roma permanecerá; quando o Coliseu ruir, Roma ruirá e quando Roma cair, o mundo cairá".

A construção do Coliseu foi iniciada por Vespasiano, nos anos 70 da nossa era. O edifício foi inaugurado por Tito, em 80, embora apenas tivesse sido finalizado poucos anos depois. Empresa colossal, este edifício, inicialmente, poderia sustentar no seu interior cerca de 50 000 espectadores, constando de três andares. Aquando do reinado de Alexandre Severo e Gordiano III, é ampliado com um quarto andar, podendo suster agora cerca de 90 000 espectadores. A grandiosidade deste monumento testemunha verdadeiramente o poder e esplendor de Roma na época dos Flávios.

Os jogos inaugurais do Coliseu tiveram lugar ano 80, sob o mandato de Tito, para celebrar a finalização da construção. Depois do curto reinado de Tito começar com vários meses de desastres, incluindo a erupção do Monte Vesúvio, um incêndio em Roma, e um surto de peste, o mesmo imperador inaugurou o edifício com uns jogos pródigos que duraram mais de cem dias, talvez para tentar apaziguar o público romano e os deuses. Nesses jogos de cem dias terão ocorrido combates de gladiadores, venationes (lutas de animais), execuções, batalhas navais, caçadas e outros divertimentos numa escala sem precedentes.

O Coliseu, como não se encontrava inserido numa zona de encosta, enterrado, tal como normalmente sucede com a generalidade dos teatros e anfiteatros romanos, possuía um “anel” artificial de rocha à sua volta, para garantir sustentação e, ao mesmo tempo, esta substrutura serve como ornamento ao edifício e como condicionador da entrada dos espectadores. Tal como foi referido anteriormente, possuía três pisos, sendo mais tarde adicionado um outro. É construído em mármore, pedra travertina, ladrilho e tufo (pedra calcária com grandes poros). A sua planta elíptica mede dois eixos que se estendem aproximadamente de 190 m por 155 m. A fachada compõe-se de arcadas decoradas com colunas dóricas, jónicas e coríntias, de acordo com o pavimento em que se encontravam. Esta subdivisão deve-se ao facto de ser uma construção essencialmente vertical, criando assim uma diversificação do espaço.

 

Os assentos eram em mármore e a cavea, escadaria ou arquibancada, dividia-se em três partes, correspondentes às diferentes classes sociais: o podium, para as classes altas; as maeniana, sector destinado à classe média; e os portici, ou pórticos, construídos em madeira, para a plebe e as mulheres. O pulvinar, a tribuna imperial, encontrava-se situada no podium e era balizada pelos assentos reservados aos senadores e magistrados. Rampas no interior do edifício facilitavam o acesso às várias zonas de onde podiam visualizar o espectáculo, sendo protegidos por uma barreira e por uma série de arqueiros posicionados numa passagem de madeira, para o caso de algum acidente. Por cima dos muros ainda são visíveis as mísulas, que sustentavam o velarium, enorme cobertura de lona destinada a proteger do sol os espectadores e, nos subterrâneos, ficavam as jaulas dos animais, bem como todas as celas e galerias necessárias aos serviços do anfiteatro.

O monumento permaneceu como sede principal dos espetáculos da urbe romana até ao período do imperador Honorius, no século V. Danificado por um terremoto no começo do mesmo século, foi alvo de uma extensiva restauração na época de Valentinianus III. Em meados do século XIII, a família Frangipani transformou-o em fortaleza e, ao longo dos séculos XV e XVI, foi por diversas vezes saqueado, perdendo grande parte dos materiais nobres com os quais tinha sido construído.

Os relatos romanos referem-se a cristãos sendo martirizados em locais de Roma descritos pouco pormenorizadamente (no anfiteatro, na arena...), quando Roma tinha numerosos anfiteatros e arenas. Apesar de muito provavelmente o Coliseu não ter sido utilizado para martírios, o Papa Bento XIV consagrou-o no século XVII à Paixão de Cristo e declarou-o lugar sagrado. Os trabalhos de consolidação e restauração parcial do monumento, já há muito em ruínas, foram feitos sobretudo pelos pontífices Gregório XVI e Pio IX, no século XIX.

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base boneyard museum, Tucson, Arizona

----

Two Allison/Rolls-Royce T56-A-427 turboprops, 5,100-shp each

 

DSC_0419 Anx2 V2 2014-10-25 1200h Q90 0.5k-1.5k

English:

CH-148 Cyclone

Royal Canadian Air Force

 

The CH-148 Cyclone is one of the most capable maritime helicopters in the world. It is Canada’s main ship-borne maritime helicopter, and it provides air support to the Royal Canadian Navy.

 

The Cyclone can be used for surface and sub-surface surveillance, search and rescue missions, tactical transport and more. It can operate during the day or night and in most weather conditions to support missions in Canada and around the world.

 

Length: 17.22 m

Length (folded configuration): 14.78 m

Rotor span: 17.48 m

Height: 5.44 m

Maximum Gross Weight: 13,000 kg

Maximum speed: 287 km/h

Range: 740 km

Location(s):

Patricia Bay, B.C.

Shearwater, N.S.

  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Français :

CH-148 Cyclone

Aviation royale canadienne

 

Le CH-148 Cyclone figure parmi les hélicoptères maritimes les plus efficaces au monde. À titre de principal hélicoptère maritime embarqué du Canada, son travail consiste à apporter un soutien aérien à la Marine royale canadienne.

 

Le CH-148 Cyclone accomplit notamment des missions de surveillance et de contrôle de surface et sous-marins, de recherche et de sauvetage et de transport tactique. Il peut accomplir son travail de jour comme de nuit, dans la majorité des conditions météorologiques, afin de soutenir les missions canadiennes et internationales.

 

Longeur : 17,22 m

Longeur (plié) : 14,78 m

Envergure du rotor : 17,48 m

Hauteur : 5,44 m

Masse totale maximale : 13 000 kg

Vitesse maximale : 287 km/h

Autonomie : 740 km

Bases :

Patricia Bay, C.-B.

Shearwater, N.-É.

  

www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/aircraft-current/ch-148.page

 

These angel creatures are all combat–capable and are among those that appear to aid the Prime Galaxy in small numbers from time to time and would fight in a full–fledged army of God in the event of an apocalyptic–scale conflict against demons and/or abominations. Also featured here is one very special individual.

 

• Kuthlody: A being that deliberately resembles a musical note in basic shape. However, functionally there is nothing musical about the Kuthlody, sadly. Instead, it is a multi–purpose battle–oriented unit that can free–float but also rest on the ground by standing on its "chin", and flies around swinging itself at enemies (when there are enemies to be swung at; when there aren't it just flies around aimlessly). In addition, the Kuthlody possesses four small, circular blades that can be launched from its sides at will and controlled remotely in midair, and return to the user after hitting (or missing) the target, like a boomerang. Kuthlodies also have an alternate mode which they enter when picked up and used as weapons by larger humanoid–like beings such as DeyRhine. They do not mind being used as melee weapons at all, for it is not all that different than what they would normally do. This angel's mean durability value is 650.

 

• Harus–Ovactus: While the DeyRhine is the Juggernaut of Faith, the Harus–Ovactus is the Juggernaut of Justice. The two creatures are counterparts of one another. And while the DeyRhine, though inherently powerful, is a ceremonial creature not particularly suited for fighting, the Harus–Ovactus is made for fighting or, more accurately, for shooting and bombarding. Also, it can speak telepathically, unlike the DeyRhine, at least to other angels.

One of the most violent angels out there (as far as angels do go), it resembles a moderately–sized flying saucer that is constantly kept afloat by the Rainbow Energy capsule sticking out of its bottom, which unfortunately is its weak point, though fortunately it is also very sturdy and not any easier to dislodge or destroy than any other part of the angel's body. And the Harus–Ovactus has a durability value of over 5,000.

They originate from the Temple of Infinity, where each new Harus–Ovactus is hand–crafted by Vaynmizs himself, and after being brought to life begin patrolling between both Paradise and Neo–Skyhold. They are equipped with three main weapons: two standard–issue Rainbow Energy lasers, two highly accurate non–lethal sniper guns that instantly tranquilize any living thing their projectiles touch, and bomb hatches that drop powerful wide–radius magical grenades on enemies, which are harmless to angels and positively lethal to everything else. Due to the angel's violent nature, the Harus–Ovactus is highly corruptible and can be hijacked and/or reprogrammed by demons. In this situation it must be destroyed as soon as possible.

 

• Jebgulex: A slight, lanky humanoid angel with a single massive eye in place of a face that controls a floating platform which it stands and rides around on and will never fall off of, and several normal–sized eyes that float above its head. Said platform has a structure beneath it that includes an indestructible Rainbow Energy laser that will only disappear if the Jebgulex itself is killed. All of its eyes, both the floating ones and the giant ones, can also shoot these lasers. The Jebgulex has one handless, featureless and useless arm, and another one that can, again, shoot Rainbow Energy lasers. Due to lacking a mouth, it cannot talk, but would if it did have one. Its durability value is roughly 400. This is somewhat made up for by its many eyes, all of which provide vision in addition to their laser powers.

 

• Enkheses: Firstly, note that the word "Enkheses" is both the singular and plural form of this creature's name. The Enkheses is a corporeal, humanoid angelic warrior with a stout, short and fat body and predominantly purple complexion. It spends most of its time receiving prayer, which makes it more powerful as with many other angels, in the outer circles of Paradise. It also has a mind and personality, and is allowed two hours per day to indulge itself in productive ways such as reading, writing and creating other art, which sometimes goes on to be added to the permanent fixtures of Heaven if it is good enough. Enkheses are only able to compose and visualize about good and pure things, both due to mandate and by their own nature, so what they produce usually isn't as varied or compelling as what mortals can produce, but can have just as much talent and effort put into it. In times of crisis however, they are more than capable of defending themselves and even being part of the offensive, and, as mentioned above, they would be among the ranks of an angel army if one ever needed to be assembled. Enkheses have superhumanoid strength and fighting skills, and durability values of more than 1,000. Because of the similarities between the two beings, the Merthaldu consider the Enkheses to be the patron angels of their race and often name themselves after them.

 

• Yuyonarf: Yuyonarfs are very small flying angels that always act in groups of three or more. They are similar in many respects to the Harus–Ovactus in that they are created by Vaynmizs at the Temple of Infinity and can fly freely throughout all the levels of Heaven. The key difference is that Yuyonarfs are much, much smaller and are intended to be implemented as minor and/or support units to complement their larger siblings. Their fronts very much resemble faces or masks, though this is coincidental, and small, sharp projectiles are shot through the holes in these alleged masks. They are also surrounded by small force fields that can absorb most hostile projectiles that come near them. The designs and appearances of the "faces" and force fields vary wildly between individuals, and there are millions of them in existence, all with an in some way unique appearance. Each "pack" of Yuyonarfs shares a single mind between its members, while each individual has its own (tiny and simple) soul. And yes, there is a difference. The Yuyonarf is about 2–3 feet in height and they have durability values ranging from 200–400.

 

• Connor "'The Great' Thorn" Thorn, the Messiah of the Delta Octant: "Thorn" was the name of the messianic hero whose appearance was foretold in passage 7:19 of the Next Testament, and who would deliver the Delta Octant from certain destruction at the hands of one of the greatest evils to ever befall the Prime Galaxy, Cosmo'rath: the most vile and ruthless portion of Reson's Arcane Order, led by the Xoultac Evil Ninja Emperor Heinrich, who is now known to have been a certifiable sociopath by demon standards, and also a pathological liar because he wasn't even a ninja whatsoever! Anyway, he was Bad with a capital "B" and his minions were equally evil. The conflict against them was known as the Vision Wars, and it was one of the most brutal the galaxy has ever seen. But, it was written that Thorn would come and save all from him and them just when things were looking their bleakest. The faithful never doubted that their hero would come eventually, not even when an entire species was eradicated and another 100% corrupted beyond redemption (Note: survivors from both those races were later found elsewhere and thanks to them they are not extinct). But today, no one doubts that no one expected for Thorn to be a human. You read that correctly, a human: the only known one to ever set foot into the Nava–Verse and thus the very last of his kind alive (or was he?). And he wasn't even sent down from the humans' Heaven above our Heaven either, but was rather taken from Earth during his lifetime and well before the Rapture, and abruptly re–materialized aboard Air Station Alpha–Beta–Delta–Gamma–Omega in the middle of the infamous battle against the corrupted Rorke–Norgs invading it in early Age 568. It is generally agreed upon that if Thorn did not appear then and there, every Flufewog aboard that installation would have died that day. But when he did appear, the final outcome of the battle was the destruction of the entire invading force and their ship, albeit with very heavy casualties on the good side. Thorn was injured severely in the battle, wherein he killed key Cosmo'rath general Yemu'Ix the Netojax, and afterward crash landed on planet Sertrop in an escape pod where he was discovered by the Merthaldu of a nearby conveniently–located village, and given treatment. It was here that Thorn revealed his status as a human, to the shock of everyone present. Unfortunately, the circumstances under which he was brought to our universe from his have been lost to history, for no one wrote anything down due to the urgent situation they were all in. It was also here that he befriended a Glanmi named Frilla, the last of her kind on Sertrop, who would play a key role later even in death.

Connor Thorn was then taken to Sertrop's central city of Nog'Dod, and sent toward Heinrich's floating palace of Pride orbiting Yominasst. To make a long story short, he and some others infiltrated the palace and eventually killed Heinrich. However, Thorn was mortally wounded in doing so and was saved only thanks to the quick thinking of the Kittpo Écuate, who in desperation poured vast quantities of the deceased Frilla's blood into the gaping hole in his body. All the bodily fluids of Glanmi have healing properties but cannot normally save someone from wounds as severe as Thorn's, but thanks to a miracle, God the Father allowed Frilla's soul to be merged with Thorn's, saving his life and permanently turning him into a human–Glanmi hybrid. The transformation was not immediate, but rather took place over the next several days. Connor Thorn was now an eternally youthful and biologically immortal mutant. He went on to later have many more heroic adventures, though none as notable as his first.

Thorn lived until Age 809, when he was killed by Lord Reson in during an ill–advised attack on the immensely powerful villain who had been spotted in the Gomorran Desert Plane. He was part of an elite strike team sent down through the Lower Dimensional Rift to try to assassinate the demon(?), of which there were no survivors. As billions mourned the hero's loss, the angels announced that he had been reunited with his own kind as a pure human soul in the Heaven above our Heaven. Many manly tears were shed that fateful day.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ 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 Wasp was a transonic British jet-powered fighter aircraft that was developed by Folland for the Royal Air Force (RAF) during the late 1940s and early 1950s. The Wasp’s origins could be traced back to a privately funded 1952 concept for a bigger and more capable day fighter aircraft than Folland’s very light Midget/Gnat. The Wasp’s development had been continued until the Gnat’s service introduction, and by then it had evolved under the handle “Fo-145” into a supersonic aircraft that took advantage of the new Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine, swept wings and area rule. The aircraft was built with the minimum airframe size to take the reheated Saphire and a radar system that would allow it to deploy the new de Havilland Blue Jay (later Firestreak) guided air-to-air missile. In this form the aircraft was expected to surpass the Royal Air Force’s contemporary day fighter, the only gun-armed Hawker Hunter, which had been in service since 1954, while using basically the same engine as its F.2 variant, in both performance and armament aspects. The missile-armed Wasp was also expected to replace the disappointing Supermarine Swift and the Fairey Fireflash AAMs that had been developed for it.

The Wasp strongly resembled the smaller Gnat, with a similar but much thinner shoulder mounted wing, with a sweep of 35° at quarter chord, but the new aircraft featured some innovations. Beyond the area-ruled fuselage, the aircraft had full-span leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps with roll control achieved using spoilers rather than traditional ailerons. Anticipating supersonic performance, the tailplane was all-moving. The cockpit had been raised and offered the pilot a much better all-round field of view.

 

The Wasp was armed with four 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, located under the air intakes. Each gun had a provision of 125 rounds, from form a mutual ventral ammunition bay that could be quickly replaced. Four underwing hardpoints could carry an ordnance load of up to 4.000 lb, and the Wasp’s main armament consisted of up to four IR-guided “Firestreak” AAMs. To effectively deploy them, however, a radar system was necessary. For launch, the missile seeker was slaved to the Wasp’s AI.Mk.20 X-band radar until lock was achieved and the weapon was launched, leaving the interceptor free to acquire another target. The AI.Mk.20 had been developed by EKCO since 1953 under the development label “Green Willow” for the upcoming EE Lightning interceptor, should the latter’s more complex and powerful Ferranti AIRPASS system fail. A major advantage of the AI.Mk.20 was that it had been designed as a single unit so it could be fit into the nose of smaller single-seat fighters, despite its total weight of roughly 400 lb (200 kg). For the Firestreak AAM, EKCO had developed a spiral-scan radar with a compact 18 in (460 mm) antenna that offered an effective range of about 10 miles (16 km), although only against targets very close to the centerline of the radar. The radar’s maximum detection range was 25 mi (40 km) and the system also acted as a ranging radar, providing range input to the gyro gunsight for air-to-air gunnery.

Beyond Firestreaks, the Wasp could also carry drop tanks (which were area-ruled and coulc only be carried on the inner pair of pylons), SNEB Pods with eighteen 68 mm (2.68 in) unguided rocket projectiles against air and ground targets, or iron bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber. Other equipment included a nose-mounted, and a forward-facing gun camera.

 

The Royal Air Force was sufficiently impressed to order two prototypes. Since the afterburning version of the Sapphire was not ready yet, the first prototype flew on 30 July 1954 with a non-afterburning engine, an Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6 with 8,000 lbf (35.59 kN). In spite of this lack of power the aircraft nevertheless nearly reached Mach 1 in its maiden flight. The second prototype, equipped with the intended Sapphire Sa.7 afterburning engine with 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) thrust engine, showed the aircraft’s full potential. The Wasp turned out to have very good handling, and the RAF officially ordered sixty Folland Fo-145 day-fighters under the designation “Wasp F.Mk.1”. The only changes from the prototypes were small leading-edge extensions at the wing roots, improving low speed handling, esp. during landings and at high angles of incidence in flight.

 

Most Wasps were delivered to RAF Germany frontline units, including No. 20 and 92 Squadrons based in Northern Germany. However, the Wasp’s active service did not last long, because technological advancements quickly rendered the aircraft obsolete in its original interceptor role. The Wasp’s performance had not turned out as significantly superior to the Hunter as expected. Range was rather limited, and the aircraft turned out to be underpowered, since the reheated Sapphire Sa6 did not develop as much power as expected. The AI.Mk.20 radar was rather weak and capricious, too, and the Firestreak was an operational nightmare. The missile was, due to its solid Magpie rocket motor and the ammonia coolant for the IR seeker head, highly toxic and RAF armorers had to wear some form of CRBN protection to safely mount the missile onto an aircraft. Furthermore, unlike modern missiles, Firestreak’s effectiveness was very limited since it could only be fired outside cloud - and over Europe or in winter, skies were rarely clear.

 

Plans for a second production run of the Folland Wasp with a more powerful Sapphire Sa7R engine with a raised thrust of 12,300 lbf (54.7 kN) and updated avionics were not carried out. During the 1960s, following the successful introduction of the supersonic English Electric Lightning in the interceptor role, the Wasp, as well as the older but more prosperous and versatile Hunter, transitioned to being operated as a fighter-bomber, advanced trainer and for tactical photo reconnaissance missions.

This led to a limited MLU program for the F.Mk.1s and conversions of the remaining airframes into two new variants: the new main version was the GR.Mk.2, a dedicated CAS/ground attack variant, which had its radar removed and replaced with ballast, outwardly recognizable through a solid metal nose which replaced the original fiberglass radome. Many of these machines also had two of the 30mm guns removed to save weight. Furthermore, a handful Wasps were converted into PR.Mk.3s. These had as set of five cameras in a new nose section with various windows, and all the guns and the ammunition bay were replaced with an additional fuel tank, operating as pure, unarmed reconnaissance aircraft. When Folland was integrated into the Hawker Siddeley Group in 1963 the aircraft’s official name was changed accordingly, even though the Folland name heritage persisted.

 

Most of these aircraft remained allocated to RAF Germany units and retired towards the late Sixties, but four GR.Mk.2s were operated by RAF No. 57 (Reserve) Squadron and based at No. 3 Flying Training School at Cranwell, where they were flown as adversaries in dissimilar aerial combat training. The last of the type was withdrawn from service in 1969, but one aircraft remained flying with the Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment at Boscombe Down until 24 January 1975.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 45 ft 10.5 in (13.983 m)

Wingspan: 31 ft 7.5 in (9.639 m)

Height: 13 ft 2.75 in (4.0323 m)

Wing area: 250 sq ft (23 m2)

Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6,264 kg)

Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9,541 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 23,459 lb (10,641 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6, producing 7,450 lbf (33.1 kN) thrust at 8,300 rpm,

military power dry, and 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 631 kn (726 mph, 1,169 km/h) / M1.1 at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)

654 kn (753 mph; 1,211 km/h) at sea level

Cruise speed: 501 kn (577 mph, 928 km/h)

Range: 1,110 nmi (1,280 mi, 2,060 km)

Service ceiling: 49,000 ft (15,000 m)

Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)

Wing loading: 84 lb/sq ft (410 kg/m2)

Thrust/weight: 0.5

 

Armament:

4× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, 125 rounds per gun

4× underwing hardpoints for a total external ordnance of 4.000 lb, including Firestreak AAMs,

SNEB pods, bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber or two 125 imp gal (570 l) drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly

This kit travesty is a remake of a simple but brilliant idea of fellow modeler chrisonord at whatifmodellers’com (www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=48434.msg899420#m...), who posted his own build in late 2020: a Grumman Tiger in standard contemporary RAF colors as Folland Wasp GR.Mk.2. The result looked like a highly credible “big brother” or maybe successor of Folland’s diminutive Midge/Gnat fighter, something in the Hawker Hunter’s class. I really like the idea a lot and decided that it was, one and a half years later, to build my personal interpretation of the subject – also because I had a Hasegawa F11F kit in The Stash™ without a proper plan.

 

The Tiger was built basically OOB – a simple and straightforward affair that goes together well, just the fine, raised panel lines show the mould’s age. The only changes I made: the arrester hook disappeared under PSR, small stabilizer fins (from an Italeri BAe Hawk) were added under the tail section, and I replaced the Tiger’s rugged twin wheel front landing gear with a single wheel alternative, left over from a Matchbox T-2 Buckeye. On the main landing gear, the rearward-facing stabilizing struts were deleted (for a lighter look of a land-based aircraft) and their wells filled with putty. A late modification were additional swing arms for the main landing gear, though: once the kit could sit on its own three feet, the stance was odd and low, esp. under the tail – probably due to the new front wheel. As a remedy I glued additional swing arm elements, made from 1mm steel wire, under the original struts, what moved the main wheel a little backwards and raised the main landing gear my 1mm. Does not sound like much, but it was enough to lift the tail and give the aircraft a more convincing stance and ground clearance.

 

The area-ruled drop tanks and their respective pylons were taken from the Hasegawa kit. For a special “British” touch – because the Tiger had a radome (into which no radar was ever fitted, though) – I added a pair of Firestreak AAMs on the outer underwing stations, procured from a Gomix Gloster Javelin (which comes with four of these, plus pylons).

  

Painting and markings:

Since the RAF theme was more or less settled, paintwork revolved around more or less authentical colors and markings. The Wasp received a standard RAF day fighter scheme from the late Fifties, with upper camouflage in RAF Dark Green/Dark Sea Grey and Light Aircraft Grey undersides with a low waterline. I used Humbrol 163, 106 and 166, respectively – Ocean Grey was used because I did not have the proper 164 at hand, but 106 also offered the benefit of a slightly better contrast to the murky Dark Green. A black ink washing was applied plus some panel post-shading. The silver leading edges on wings, stabilizers and fin were created with decal sheet material, avoiding the inconvenience of masking.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in a very dark grey (Revell 09, Anthracite) while the landing gear, wheels and wells received a greyish-metallic finish (Humbrol 56, Aluminum Dope). The air intakes’ interior became bright aluminum (Revell 99), the area around the jet nozzle was painted with Revell 91 (Iron metallic) and later treated with graphite for a dark metallic shine. The drop tanks were camouflaged, the Firestreaks became white so that they would stand out well and add to a certain vintage look.

 

The decals were a mix from various sources. The No. 20 Squadron badges and the Type D high-viz roundels on the wings were left over from an Airfix Hawker Hunter. The fuselage roundels came from an Italeri BAe Hawk sheet, IIRC. The bent fin flash, all the stencils as well as the serial code (which was puzzled together from two real serials and was AFAIK not allocated to any real RAF aircraft) came from an Xtradecal Supermarine Swift sheet. The individual red “B” letter came from a Matchbox A.W. Meteor night fighter.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish – I considered a glossy finish, since this was typical for RAF aircraft in the Fifties, but eventually just gave the radome a light shine.

  

Basically a simple project, and quickly done in just a couple of days. However, chrisonord’s great eye for similarities makes this “Tiger in disguise” a great fictional aircraft model with only little effort, it’s IMHO very convincing. And the RAF colors and markings suit the F11F very well.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.

 

As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.

 

The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.

 

The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.

 

Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).

 

However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.

 

Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.

 

The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.

 

The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.

As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.

 

Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.

 

With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position

15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot

Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)

Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;

plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)

1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)

Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks

Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)

Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)

Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

No internal guns.

4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,

plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)

AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.

 

However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.

 

The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.

 

Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.

On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.

The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.

 

Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.

 

The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.

  

Painting and markings:

No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.

 

Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).

The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).

The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.

 

After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.

 

Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).

 

The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.

  

The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.

You can find more about the herbal treatment for premature ejaculation at

www.naturogain.com/product/best-male-sexual-stamina-pills...

 

Dear friend, in this video we are going to discuss about the herbal treatment for premature ejaculation. Lawax capsules and oil in combination provide the best herbal treatment for premature ejaculation to become a capable lover in bed.

 

If you liked this video, then please subscribe to our YouTube Channel to get updates of other useful health video tutorials. You can also find us on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and Google+.

 

Google+: plus.google.com/+NaturoGainSupport/

Facebook: www.facebook.com/naturogain

Twitter:https://twitter.com/naturogain

Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/naturogain/

 

Herbal Treatment For Premature Ejaculation

French public debt at record high French debt in percentage of GDP value. French public debt decreased in 2013, but is still higher than expected. Total debt continues to climb and fails to meet the Maastricht criteria. EurActiv France reports. Despite austerity measures, France's public deficit did not meet its government targets for 2013. The French National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) published figures showing that it currently stands at 4.3% of GDP.The French government expected this percentage to be 4.1%, whilst the European Commission predicted 4.2%. However timid, the reduction of public deficit from its previous level of 4.9%, in 2013, is still a significant improvement. Struggling with revenue On closer inspection, the statistics should worry the French government. Although expenses reached target reductions from 3% in 2012 to 2%¨in 2013, revenue is lower than expected. Revenue has decreased from 3.3% compared to 3.7% in 2012. The state has reduced its financial needs, but those of local administrations have increased. According to a press release from the French Ministry of Budget, Public Accounts and Civil Administration, “measures to restore public accounts recorded a historical 2.5 percentage points of GDP, whereas unfavourable economic conditions adversely affected revenues by 1.5 percentage points. The implementation of expenditure, consistent with expectations, proves the government’s ability to meet spending targets set by the parliament”. Almost €2000 billion of debt France's Ministry of Finance criticised the debt-to-GDP ratio, and called for a change in the calculation. According to the INSEE, public debt was 93%, or €1925 billion, in 2013, a new record, and higher than the €1841 billion recorded in 2012. The French Ministry of Finance argues that this number should not include financial support provided to European states like Greece, Spain or Portugal. It should also exclude the contributions made to the European Stability Mechanism, the measure put in place to help ailing banks. When excluding financial support to troubled countries, and the capitalisation of the European Stability Mechanism, the debt ratio is 90.4% of GDP. The Minister of Economy highlights that “it would then be in line with government forecasts,” and effectively blames the EU for another French mishandling of public accounts. Socialist leaders in concerted push to relax EU budgetary constraints

Le Pen eyes VP role in new far-right EU Parliament group Brussels wages new battle against VAT fraud. ECB rate cut boosts Spanish, Italian yields Insurance companies push forward with European investment EU fines SIM card chip cartel €138 million UK government: Independent Scotland can't both rejoin the EU and keep the pound

French bosses rally around Juncker's 300 billion investment plan France is one of the countries of which the public debt exceeds economic convergence criteria set out by the Treaty of Maastricht, both in terms of annual deficit and total volume of debt. According to the treaty, public deficit should not exceed 3% of GDP, and public debt should be limited to 60% of GDP.Macroeconomic and public finance predictions for 2014-2017 should be provided to the parliament within the stability programme in mid-April and to the Commission before 30 April.The Juncker team revealed Ukraine to request NATO membership Putin: ‘I can take Kiev in two weeks if I want’ Britain handed climate and energy portfolio in draft Juncker Commission line-up Parliament reacts to Juncker’s plan to merge energy and climate portfolios Poroshenko: The EU's agenda now revolves around Ukraine Bildt slams Juncker over absence of enlargement portfolio Cyber threat now ‘real and growing’, EU official warns Commission cautiously welcomes news of Ukraine ‘ceasefire’ EU considers ban on Russian bond-buying as part of new sanctions package

Efficacité et Transparence des Acteurs Européens © 1999-2014 EurActiv.com PLC | Terms and Conditions...As history has shown, France is capable of the best and the worst, and often in short periods of time. On the day following Marine Le Pen's Front National victory in the European elections, however, France made a decisive contribution to the reinvention of a radical politics for the 21st century. On that day, the committee for a citizen's audit on the public debt issued a 30-page report on French public debt, its origins and evolution in the past decades. The report was written by a group of experts in public finances under the coordination of Michel Husson, one of France's finest critical economists. Its conclusion is straightforward: 60% of French public debt is illegitimate. Anyone who has read a newspaper in recent years knows how important debt is to contemporary politics. As David Graeber among others has shown, we live in debtocracies, not democracies. Debt, rather than popular will, is the governing principle of our societies, through the devastating austerity policies implemented in the name of debt reduction. Debt was also a triggering cause of the most innovative social movements in recent years, the Occupy movement. If it were shown that public debts were somehow illegitimate, that citizens had a right to demand a moratorium – and even the cancellation of part of these debts – the political implications would be huge. It is hard to think of an event that would transform social life as profoundly and rapidly as the emancipation of societies from the constraints of debt. And yet this is precisely what the French report aims to do. The audit is part of a wider movement of popular debt audits in more than 18 countries. Ecuador and Brazil have had theirs, the former at the initiative of Rafael Correa's government, the latter organised by civil society. European social movements have also put in place debt audits, especially in countries harder hit by the sovereign debt crisis, such as Greece and Spain. In Tunisia, the post-revolutionary government declared the debt taken out during Ben Ali's dictatorship an "odious" debt: one that served to enrich the clique in power, rather than improving the living conditions of the people. The report on French debt contains several key findings. Primarily, the rise in the state's debt in the past decades cannot be explained by an increase in public spending. The neoliberal argument in favour of austerity policies claims that debt is due to unreasonable public spending levels; that societies in general, and popular classes in particular, live above their means. This is plain false. In the past 30 years, from 1978 to 2012 more precisely, French public spending has in fact decreased by two GDP points. What, then, explains the rise in public debt? First, a fall in the tax revenues of the state. Massive tax reductions for the wealthy and big corporations have been carried out since 1980. In line with the neoliberal mantra, the purpose of these reductions was to favour investment and employment. Well, unemployment is at its highest today, whereas tax revenues have decreased by five points of GDP.The second factor is the increase in interest rates, especially in the 1990s. This increase favoured creditors and speculators, to the detriment of debtors. Instead of borrowing on financial markets at prohibitive interest rates, had the state financed itself by appealing to household savings and banks, and borrowed at historically normal rates, the public debt would be inferior to current levels by 29 GDP points. Tax reductions for the wealthy and interest rates increases are political decisions. What the audit shows is that public deficits do not just grow naturally out of the normal course of social life. They are deliberately inflicted on society by the dominant classes, to legitimise austerity policies that will allow the transfer of value from the working classes to the wealthy ones. A stunning finding of the report is that no one actually knows who holds the French debt. To finance its debt, the French state, like any other state, issues bonds, which are bought by a set of authorised banks. These banks then sell the bonds on the global financial markets. Who owns these titles is one of the world's best kept secrets. The state pays interests to the holders, so technically it could know who owns them. Yet a legally organised ignorance forbids the disclosure of the identity of the bond holders. This deliberate organisation of ignorance – agnotology – in neoliberal economies intentionally renders the state powerless, even when it could have the means to know and act. This is what permits tax evasion in its various forms – which last year cost about €50bn to European societies, and €17bn to France alone. Hence, the audit on the debt concludes, some 60% of the French public debt is illegitimate. An illegitimate debt is one that grew in the service of private interests, and not the wellbeing of the people. Therefore the French people have a right to demand a moratorium on the payment of the debt, and the cancellation of at least part of it. There is precedent for this: in 2008 Ecuador declared 70% of its debt illegitimate. The nascent global movement for debt audits may well contain the seeds of a new internationalism – an internationalism for today – in the working classes throughout the world. This is, among other things, a consequence of financialisation. Thus debt audits might provide a fertile ground for renewed forms of international mobilisations and solidarity.

This new internationalism could start with three easy steps. 1) Debt audits in all countries The crucial point is to demonstrate, as the French audit did, that debt is a political construction, that it doesn't just happen to societies when they supposedly live above their means. This is what justifies calling it illegitimate, and may lead to cancellation procedures. Audits on private debts are also possible, as the Chilean artist Francisco Tapia has recently shown by auditing student loans in an imaginative way. 2) The disclosure of the identity of debt holders A directory of creditors at national and international levels could be assembled. Not only would such a directory help fight tax evasion, it would also reveal that while the living conditions of the majority are worsening, a small group of individuals and financial institutions has consistently taken advantage of high levels of public indebtedness. Hence, it would reveal the political nature of debt. 3) The socialisation of the banking system The state should cease to borrow on financial markets, instead financing itself through households and banks at reasonable and controllable interest rates. The banks themselves should be put under the supervision of citizens' committees, hence rendering the audit on the debt permanent. In short, debt should be democratised. This, of course, is the harder part, where elements of socialism are introduced at the very core of the system. Yet, to counter the tyranny of debt on every aspect of our lives, there is no alternative.

  

In 1938 Czechoslovakia mobilized against the German threats of war, but hat to give in to the Munich Agreement and withdraw from the border fortifications, even if the army was fully capable to stand against the Wehrmacht. After this not only Germany, but also Poland and Hungary ripped pieces of land from the country, and there were also extensive fights with insurgents, which cost lives of many Czechoslovak soldiers and gendarmes. Today it´s a tradition to reenact how the situation could be, when we would have defended ourselfs. It´s a fact that Hitler was affraid of the Czechoslovak military, which at that time had better tanks, more heavy guns, and a very effective fortification system. Of course we win in the reenactments :-)

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.