The SR-71 Blackbird served NASA as a high-speed, high altitude research aircraft capable of attaining altitudes above 85,000 feet with a cruising speed up to Mach 3.32 (2,193 mph). To enable it to withstand high temperatures generated by aerodynamic heating the airplane was built primarily from titanium alloys, with special composite materials on the edges of the wings, the fuselage, and the other areas to reduce radar cross-section.

 

Built in 1967, this airplane was the final Blackbird built and the last to fly. Air Force crews flew it on operational reconnaissance missions over Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

 

After being transferred to NASA in 1990, it carried scientific experiments in support of spacecraft and aircraft development, astronomy, environmental monitoring, and sonic boom research. By its final flight, on October 9, 1999, the aircraft had completed 734 flights- 678 for the Air Force and 56 in NASA research missions- and accumulated 2,353.6 flight hours.

(Text from a sign at the site)

Manufacturer: Rogue

Nationality: United states

First assembled: March 31, 2205

Birthplace: Lemont, IL

Engine: 6.3 L V8

HP: 550 BHP

0-60: 5.5 seconds

Top speed: 220.23 MPH

 

The Rogue Destroyer GTS has made a reputation for itself as one of the pinnacle super sportscars of recent times. More than enough power to tear up a dragstrip, handling to rival hypercars, 50/50 weight distribution and parts that actually come from hypercars to start with. The Destroyer wasn't always the success it was today, though. Years before it wasn't even known as the Destroyer and was an entirely different car. Simply called the GTS, this proto-destroyer was from a time when Rogue only made high-octane mid engine supercars, not 2 door sportscars or anything else, really. Rogue's inexpirience with building this kind of car really showed in the GTS. First off, the styling was rather awkward, vents and slopes never really in the right places. Second was the handling. Due to over 3,600 Ibs being rather poorly distributed at almost 30/70, it was hard to get anything without spinning around in the corners. And adding weight to the back would just make the GTS slower and have handling comparable to a luxobarge. With a 0-60 of 5.2 seconds it wasn't the quickest either. The engine was a thirsty 6.3 Liter V8 producing a rather underwhelming 550 BHP, considering what that engine was capable of in Rogue's hands. Still, tuning the engine for more power was easy, and would have been seen on alot of GTS's if there were alot of GTS's to start with. The GTS's sales were poor, and only 720 are know to have ever left the Lemont factory. Considered a failure by critics, Rogue enthusiasts, and even Rogue themselves, the later Destroyer GTS was a much-needed redemption.

The GMC CCKW, also known as ''Jimmy'', or the G-508 by its Ordnance Supply Catalog number, was a highly successful series of Off-Road capable, 2 1⁄2-ton, 6×6 Trucks, built in large numbers to a standardized design between 1941 to 1945 for the U.S. Army, that saw heavy service, predominantly as Cargo Trucks, in both World War Two and the Korean War. The original ''Deuce and a Half'' it formed the backbone of the famed ''Red Ball Express'' that kept Allied Armies supplied as they pushed eastward after the Normandy invasion.

 

The CCKW came in many variants, including open or closed cab, long wheelbase (LWB) CCKW-353 and short (SWB) CCKW-352, and over a score of specialized models, but the bulk were standard, General Purpose Cargo models. A large minority were built with a front mounted winch, and one in four of the cabs had a Machine-Gun mounting ring above the Co-Driver's position.

 

Of the almost 2.4 million trucks that the U.S. Army bought between 1939 and December 1945, across all payload weight classes, some 812,000, or just over one third, were 2 1⁄2-ton trucks. GMC's total production of the CCKW and its variants, including the 2 1⁄2-ton, 6x6, Amphibious DUKW, and the 6x4, 5-ton (on-road) CCW-353, amounted to some 572,500 units, almost a quarter of the total World War Two U.S. truck production, and 70% of the total 2 1⁄2-ton trucks. GMC's total of ~550,000 purely 6x6 models, including the DUKW, formed the overwhelming majority of the ~675,000 six by six 2 1⁄2-ton trucks, and came in less than 100,000 shy of the almost 650,000 World War Two Jeeps. Additionally, GM built over 150,000 units of the CCKW's smaller brother, the 1 1⁄2-ton, 4x4 Chevrolet G506, at the same factory. The GMC CCKW began to be phased out, once the M35 series trucks were first deployed in the 1950's, but remained in active U.S. service until the mid-1960's. Eventually, the M35 series, originally developed by REO Motors, succeeded the CCKW as the U.S. Army's standard 2 1⁄2-ton, 6x6 Cargo Truck.

 

The name CCKW comes from GMC model nomenclature:-

 

** ''C'' - designed in 1941

 

** ''C'' - conventional cab

 

** ''K'' - all-wheel drive

 

** ''W'' - dual rear axles

 

** ''X'' experimental chassis / non-standard wheelbase (first 13,188 units)

  

In 1939-1940 the U.S. Army Ordnance Corps was developing 2 1⁄2 short tons load-rated 6x6 Tactical Trucks that could operate off-road in all weather. General Motors, already supplying modified commercial trucks to the Army, modified the 1939 ACKWX (built for the French Army) into the CCKW. The General Motors design was chosen by the Army and went into production at GM'S Yellow Truck and Coach Division's Pontiac, Michigan plant alongside 6x4 CCW's. Later they were also manufactured at GM's St. Louis, Missouri Chevrolet plant.

 

Sources do not precisely agree on the total numbers of CCKW's built by the end of production in 1945. Ware (2010) lists one single number of 562,750 of CCKW trucks, built across all variants (presumably including the amphibian DUKW) more clearly specified numbers are provided by Sunderlin in Army Motors magazine, and by Jackson, using the numbers found in the 1946 revision of the U.S. Military's Summary Report of Acceptances, Tank-Automotive Materiel. Sunderlin reports a total of 528,829 of 2 1⁄2-ton 6x6 units (excluding the DUKW) produced by GMC, versus a total of 527,168 accepted by the U.S. Army. Jackson's tabulation of the 1946 U.S. acceptances numbers adds up to 524,873 units, excluding the DUKW's and the ACKWX predecessor models. Both of these numbers still include the cab-over engine AFKWX-353 models, leaving a total of some 518,000–519,000 actual CCKW-352 and CCKW-353 units. In addition, GMC serial numbers indicate a production of 23,500 of the same bodied 6x4 CCW models, versus 23,649 units accepted by U.S. Ordnance. In any case, GM / GMC built a total of 2 1⁄2-ton, 6-wheeled trucks that was second only to the World War Two ''Jeep'' and neither Ford nor Willys individually built as many Jeeps during the war.

 

▪︎Type: 2 1⁄2-ton 6×6 Cargo Truck

▪︎Place of Origin: United States

▪︎Designer: Yellow Truck and Coach Company

▪︎Designed: 1941

▪︎Manufacturer: Yellow Truck and Coach Company / GMC Truck and Coach Division / Chevrolet ▪︎Produced: 1941 to 1945

▪︎Number Built: Grand Total = ~572,500, including all variants, CCKW specific = ~518,000 / LWB CCKW-353 = ~464,000 / SWB CCKW-352 = ~54,000 / plus ~54,500 non CCKW

▪︎Variants: 1939 ACKWX = 2,466 units / C.O.E. AFKWX = 7,235 units / 6x4 CCW-353 = 23,649 units / DUKW Amphibious =21,147 units

▪︎Mass: (353 Cargo w/winch) 8,800lb empty / 16,400lb loaded

▪︎Length: 22ft 6in / Width: 7ft 4in / Height: 7ft 9in to cab / 9ft 1in overall

▪︎Powerplant: GMC 270 straight-6 engine, 91.5hp at 2,750rpm / 104hp at 2,750rpm

▪︎Transmission: 5 speed x 2 range transfer case

▪︎Suspension: Beam axles on leaf springs

▪︎Fuel Capacity: 40 U.S gallons

▪︎Operational Range: 300 miles

▪︎Maximum Speed: 45mph.

  

Taken from Wikipedia en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_CCKW_2%C2%BD-ton_6%C3%976_truck

+++ 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 Boeing B-52 Stratofortress is a long-range, subsonic, jet-powered strategic bomber, designed and built by Boeing, which has continued to provide support and upgrades.

Beginning with the successful contract bid in June 1946, the B-52 design evolved from a straight wing aircraft powered by six turboprop engines to the final prototype YB-52 with eight turbojet engines and swept wings. The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952. Built to carry nuclear weapons for Cold War-era deterrence missions by the United States Air Force (USAF), the B-52 Stratofortress replaced the Convair B-36. A veteran of several wars, the B-52 has dropped only conventional munitions in combat, capable of carrying up to 70,000 pounds (32,000 kg) of weapons.

 

The B-52 has been in active service with the USAF since 1955. The bombers flew under the Strategic Air Command (SAC) until it was inactivated in 1992 and its aircraft absorbed into the Air Combat Command (ACC). In 2010 all B-52 Stratofortresses were transferred from the ACC to the new Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC).

 

Superior performance at high subsonic speeds and relatively low operating costs have kept the B-52 in service despite the advent of later, more advanced aircraft, including the canceled Mach 3 B-70 Valkyrie, the variable-geometry B-1 Lancer, and the stealth B-2 Spirit. The B-52 has so far completed sixty years of continuous service with its original operator, and after being upgraded between 2013 and 2015, it is expected to serve with the USAF even into the 2040s, maybe even beyond that.

 

The only foreign operator of the B-52 had been the Royal Air Force in the 1980ies and 19990ies, and just in a small number. After the USAF's retirement of the earlier B-52 types, the remaining G and H models were used for nuclear standby ("alert") duty as part of the United States' nuclear triad. This triad was the combination of nuclear-armed land-based missiles, submarine-based missiles and manned bombers.

 

After the end of the Falkland War, the Royal Air Force withdrew its final long-range bomber type, the Avro Vulcan - which was to be replaced by the MRCA Tornado which was designed to a totally different tactical profile. Fearing the loss of international influence, the Ministry of Defence decided to fill this gap and leased twelve revamped and heavily modified B-52Gs from the USA. This was a convenient deal for both sides, since these bombers were earmarked to be scrapped per the terms of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).

 

These modified aircraft were designated B-52K by Boeing, while the RAF officially called them later in service Stratofortress B.I, even though B-52K was more common. Most obvious change was the introduction of new engines. The B-52K benefited from a Boeing study for the U.S. Air Force in the mid-1970s which investigated replacing the original TF33 engines, changing to a new wing, and other improvements to upgrade B-52G/H aircraft as an alternative to the B-1A, then in development. Boeing had suggested re-engining the complete USAF B-52 fleet with four Rolls-Royce RB211 535E-4 each. The RB211 had originally been developed for the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar in the early 1970ies, but also saw use with several Boeing airliners, the "535" being a special development for the 757 airliner.

 

This new, bigger engine would not only improve overall weight and power (total thrust 8× 17,000 lb vs .4× 37,400 lb), it would also increase range and reduce fuel consumption and simplify the whole aircraft. Despite these direct benefits the USAF did not opt for this offer: the costs for aircraft modifications, infrastructure, logistics and also for the running operations of the complete fleet would have been prohibitively high, as well as only a partial conversion. For the UK, where the weapon system was to be introduced from scratch and also on a much smaller scale, the update made sense, though.

Boeing supported the British project, since the company expected to present the UK conversion as a field case study for potential later large-scale sales to the USAF. This included extensive wind tunnel testing, in order to optimize the engine pylons. These tests also demonstrated that the new four-engined aircraft may not have enough rudder authority to counter the adverse yaw generated by an outboard engine-out scenario. As a consequence, an enlarged fin was (re-)introduced, even though it was different from the earlier B-52 variants. Actually, as a cost saving measure, fin elements from the Boeing 747 airliner were used - and its integral tank enhanced the overall fuel capacity even further.

 

The ex-USAF B-52Gs converted into K models were taken from surplus stock that not been modified into cruise missile carriers, they were rather conventional bombers with nuclear capabilities - its main purpose for the RAF. A secondary role were martime operations like mine laying or missile attacks against surface ships over long distances.

 

Hence, the RAF aircraft underwent a series of modifications to improve conventional bombing and to adapt them to RAF standards. They were fitted with a new Integrated Conventional Stores Management System (ICSMS) and new underwing pylons that could hold larger bombs or other stores, including up to twelve AGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The B-52K also introduced new radios, integrated Global Positioning System into the aircraft's navigation system and replaced. The under-nose FLIR was retained, even though with a modernized system. A fixed refluelling probe for the RAF's drogue system was installed on top of the cockpit section (earn ing the B-52K the nickname "unicorn"), and the tail gun station was deleted and replaced with ECM equipment and flare/chaff dispensers.

 

Delivery started in 1990, and the B-52K was just too late to become operational during the First Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm), in which RAF Tornados took part in, though, as well as USAF B-52s. In fact, the modified BUFF took three years to become fully operational, despite - or perhaps because of - the small fleet. In parallel, the Tornado was gradually introduced, too.

Eventually, the B-52Ks were baptized with fire: in 1999, when 'Operation Allied Force' began and USAF and RAF bombers bombarded Serb targets throughout the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - even though with mixed success, since more than 600 of the 1.000 bombs dropped by the RAF during the Kosovo conflict missed their target, the Ministry of Defence admitted in 2000.

 

In 2003 the B-52Ks also took part in the invasion of Iraq as part of 'Operation Telic'. The Iraqi Forces were unable to mobilize their air force to attempt a defense, and the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Naval Aviation, as well as the Royal Air Force, operated with impunity throughout the country, pinpointing heavily defended resistance targets and destroying them before ground troops arrived.

 

This success reinstated the B-52K's performance reputation a little, but could not deny the fact that the global political situation had changed since the fall of the Soviet Union, and that the heavy bomber was a concept of the past. Furthermore, the changing character of conflicts and the respective mission profiles made the British MoD in 2004 decide to retire the small, costly B-52K fleet, of which four aircraft had already to be grounded due to the end of their airframe lifetime. Consequently, all B-52Ks were scrapped until 2005.

 

Besides, the program results did not change the USAF's decision to keep the B-52H with its eight engine layout in service.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 5 (pilot, copilot, Weapon Systems Officer, navigator, Electronic Warfare Officer)

Length: 159 ft 4 in (48.5 m)

Wingspan: 185 ft 0 in (56.4 m)

Height: 42 ft (12.8 m)

Wing area: 4,000 sq ft (370 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 63A219.3 mod root, NACA 65A209.5 tip

Zero-lift drag coefficient: ~0,0119

Drag area: 47,60 sq ft (4,42 m²)

Aspect ratio: 8,56

Fuel capacity: 48.630 U.S. gal (40.495 imp gal; 181.090 l)

Empty weight: 185.000 lb (83.250 kg)

Loaded weight: 265.000 lb (120.000 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 488.000 lb (220.000 kg)

 

Powerplant:

4× Rolls-Royce RB211 535E-4 turbofan jet engines, rated at 17.000 kp (37.400 lb) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 560 kn (650 mph, 1.047 km/h)

Cruise speed: 442 kn (525 mph, 844 km/h)

Combat radius: 4.750 mi (4.125 nmi, 7.650 km)

Ferry range: 10.715 mi (9.300 nmi, 17.250 km)

Service ceiling: 50.000 ft (15.000 m)

Rate of climb: 6.270 ft/min (31,85 m/s)

Wing loading: 120 lb/ft² (586 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.31

Lift-to-drag ratio: 21.5 (estimated)

Armament:

Approximately 70.000 lb (31.500 kg) mixed ordnance; bombs, mines, missiles, in various

configurations in an internal bomb bay and/or on wing pylons

 

Avionics:

Electro-optical viewing system that uses platinum silicide forward looking infrared and high

resolution low-light-level television sensors

LITENING Advanced Targeting System

Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod

IBM AP-101 computer

 

The kit and its assembly:

I remember that I read about the re-engine project of the USAF's late B-52 versions when I was in school, many years ago, and the BUFF is still flying - even though in its original eight engine layout. Anyway, I wonder why this topic has not been adopted by modelers more often? O.K., a B-52 is a large aircraft, but there are good small scale version around, like the Dragon kit in 1:200 which I converted.

 

Work was pretty straightforward, and the basis is/was a B-52G. The kit was built almost OOB, only mods include:

- engine nacelles from a Hasegawa Boeing 747-400

- the upper section of the latter's fin, too

- a scratched refuelling probe

- a modified tail without the four machine guns

 

Fit is good and surface structure/details are more than satisfactory for a kit of this small scale. Only thing that bugged me was the slightly tinted canopy that is a bit too wide for the fuselage, it's hard to blend it into the rest of the body. Another building horror were the 24 itsy-tiny bombs for the quadruple MERs under the wings.

 

Integrating the Jumbo nacelles was easier than expected, even though, after finishing the conversion, I'd recommend reducing the height of the outer pyolns by 2-3 mm, so that the engines come higher and closer to the wings. Space to the ground is very little - and to mend this I lengthened the outrigger wheels slightly.

 

Another issue were the wing parts - the left wing was slightly warped, upwards, and even though I tried to bend and force it into a stright line it somehow move back into its original position, so that a B-52 on the ground was hard to realize. If you build one, tuck the landing gear up and put it on a stand. It looks better, anyway... ;)

  

Painting and markings

This was the fun part. A B-52 with four bigher jet engines is one thing, and at first I intended to create a contemporary USAF aircraft. But then I remembered the weird Hemp apint scheme for large RAF birds like the Nimrod, VC.10 or Tristar tankers, and I wondered if that could not be applied to a B-52 in "foreign service"...?

 

Said and done, and from there things unfolded in a straightforward fashion. The only consequence of the RAF as useer was the refuelling probe, and the 340kg iron bombs that came as ordnance with the kit were a welcome option, too.

 

Even though Hemp is available from Humbrol (168) I rather used a darker tone, 187. Hemp was later used for shading, though. The undersides were painted in Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) and shaded with Light Ghost Grey (FS 36375, Humbrol 127), after a light wash with highly thinned black ink. Radomes and antennae received a yellow-ish, beige finish, the landing gear and the air intakes were painted white, as well as the MERs.

 

Decals come from several kits, e .g. a Cyber Hobby 1:200 Vulcan, a Matchbox Hawk 200 and a Tornado sheet from the Operation Allied Force era (the nose art was taken from there, as well as the ZA447 code).

  

A relatively simple whif - the large engine nacelles look strange and demonstrate how slender the B-52's body actually is, compared with an airliner. But the Hemp/Grey livery suits it very well, and the pics taken from above show how effective this scheme is when the aircraft is parked on a concrete airfield - and it is even effective in the air!

 

+++ 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:

In Autumn 1946, the Saab company began internal studies aimed at developing a replacement aircraft for the Saab B 18/S 18 as Sweden's standard attack aircraft. In 1948, Saab was formally approached by the Swedish Government with a request to investigate the development of a turbojet-powered strike aircraft to replace a series of 1940s vintage attack, reconnaissance, and night-fighter aircraft then in the Flygvapnet’s inventory. On 20 December 1948, a phase one contract for the design and mock-up of the proposed aircraft was issued. The requirements laid out by the Swedish Air Force were demanding: the aircraft had to be able to attack anywhere along Sweden's 2,000 km (1,245 miles) of coastline within one hour of launch from a central location, and it had to be capable of being launched in any weather conditions, at day or night.

 

In response, Saab elected to develop a twin-seat aircraft with a low-mounted swept wing and equipped with advanced electronics. On 3 November 1952, the first prototype, under the handle “Fpl 32” (flygplan = aircraft) conducted its first flight. A small batch of prototypes completed design and evaluation trials with series production of the newly designated Saab 32 Lansen beginning in 1953. The first production A 32A Lansen attack aircraft were delivered to the Swedish Air Force and proceeded through to mid-1958, at which point manufacturing activity switched to the Lansen’s other two major scheduled variants, the J 32B all-weather fighter and the photo reconnaissance S 32C, optimized for maritime operations.

 

The idea behind the J 32 originated from the late 1940s: Even before the SAAB 29 Tunnan had taken to the air, discussions began between SAAB and the Swedish Aviation Administration regarding a future night fighter aircraft with a jet engine. Since the end of the war, the Swedish Air Force had wanted a night fighter aircraft but was forced to put these on the shelf due to cost reasons. In the end, they managed to obtain sixty de Haviland Mosquito night fighter aircraft (then designated J 30) from Great Britain as a low-budget solution, but the J 30 was far from modern at the end of the 1940s and talks with SAAB regarding a domestic alternative continued.

At the beginning of the 1950s, the Fpl 32 project was in full swing and the aircraft was selected as the basis for an indigenous all-weather jet night fighter with a sighting radar and various heavier weapons to be able to shoot down bombers – at the time of the J 32B’s design, the main bomber threat was expected to enter Swedish airspace at subsonic speed and at high altitude. The original idea was that this aircraft would replace the J 30 Mosquito from 1955 onwards, but this proved to be impossible as the J 30 fleet needed to be replaced long before this and the A 32A as initial/main varia of the Fpl 32 had priority. Because of this operational gap, in January 1951 the Swedish Air Force ordered the British de Haviland Venom (then designated J 33) as an interim all-weather fighter and plans for the J 32B were postponed until later with the idea that the Lansen’s fighter variant would replace the J 33 at the end of the 1950s and benefit from technological progress until then.

 

On 7 January 1957, the first J 32B conducted its maiden flight, and it was a considerable step forward from the A 32A attack aircraft – in fact, excepts for the hull, it had only little in common with the attack variant! The new fighter version was powered by a Rolls-Royce Avon Mk 47A (locally designated RM6A) which gave as much thrust without an afterburner as the SAAB A 32A's original RM5A2 did with an afterburner, greatly improving the aircraft’s rate of climb and acceleration, even though the J 32B remained only transonic.

The armament consisted of four heavier fixed 30 mm ADEN m/55 automatic cannon in a slightly re-contoured nose, plus Rb 24/AIM-9B Sidewinder IR-guided AAMs and various unguided rockets against air and ground targets. Instead of the A 32A’s Ericsson mapping and navigation radar, which was compatible with the indigenous Rb 04C anti-ship missile, one of the earliest cruise missiles in western service, the J 32B carried a PS-42/A. This was a search/tracking X-band radar with a gyro-stabilized antenna with a swivel range of 60° to each side and +60°/−30° up/down. The radar featured the option of a 3D display for both WSO and pilot and its data could be directly displayed in the pilot’s Sikte 6A HUD, a very modern solution at the time.

 

A total of 118 aircraft (S/N 32501-32620) were produced between 1958 and 1960, serving in four fighter units. However, the J 32B only served for just under 12 years as a fighter aircraft in the Swedish Air Force: aviation technology progressed very quickly during the 1960s and already in 1966, the J 32B began to be replaced by the J 35F, which itself was already an advanced all-weather interceptor version of the supersonic Draken. In 1969 only the Jämtland's Air Flotilla (F4) still had the J 32B left in service and the type began to be completely retired from frontline service. In 1970 the plane flew in service for the last time and in 1973 the J 32B was officially phased out of the air force, and scrapping began in 1974.

 

However, the J 32Bs’ career was not over yet: At the beginning of the 1970s, Målflygdivisionen (MFD for short, the “Target Air Division”) was still using old J 29Fs as target tugs and for other training purposes, and they needed to be replaced. The choice fell on the much more capable, robust and readily available J 32B. Twenty-four machines were transferred to the MFD in 1971 to be used for training purposes, losing their radar and cannon armament. Six of these six J 32Bs were in 1972 modified into dedicated target tugs under the designation J 32D, six more J 32Bs were left unmodified and allocated to various second-line tasks such as radio testing and ground training.

The other twelve J 32Bs (s/n 32507, -510, -512, -515, -529, -541, -543, -569, -571, -592, -607 and -612) became jamming aircraft through the implementation of ECR equipment under the designation J 32E. This electronics package included internally:

- An INGEBORG signal reconnaissance receiver with antennae in the radome,

covering S, C and L radar frequency bands

- A G24 jamming transmitter, also with its antenna in the radome, covering alternatively

S, C and L frequency bands. This device co-operated with the external ADRIAN jamming pod

- Apparatus 91B; a broadband jammer, later integrated with INGEBORG

- MORE, a jammer and search station for the VHF and UHF bands

- FB-6 tape player/recorder; used, among other things, to send false messages/interference

Additional, external equipment included:

- PETRUS: jamming pod, X-band, also radar warning, intended for jamming aircraft

and active missile radars

- ADRIAN: jamming pod, active on S- and C-band, intended for jamming land-based and

shipboard radars

- BOZ-1, -3, -9 and -100 chaff dispenser pods

 

Outwardly, the J 32E differed from its brethren only through some blade antennae around the hull, and they initially retained the fighters’ blue-green paint scheme and their tactical markings so that they were hard to distinguish from the original fighters. Over time, orange day-glow markings were added to improve visibility during training sessions. However, during the mid-Nineties, three machines received during scheduled overhauls a new all-grey low-visibility camouflage with toned-down markings, and they received the “16M” unit identifier – the only MFD aircraft to carry these openly.

 

When a J 32E crashed in 1975, three of the remaining six training J 32Bs were modified into J 32Es in 1979 to fill the ranks. The MFD kept operating the small J 32Ds and Es fleet well into the Nineties and the special unit survived two flotilla and four defense engagements. At that time, the Målflygdivisionen was part of the Swedish Air Force’s Upplands Flygflottilj (F16), but it was based at Malmen air base near Linköpping (where the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen was located, too) as a detachment unit and therefore the machines received the unit identifier “F16M”, even though the “M” suffix did normally not appear on the aircraft. However, through a defense ministry decision in 1996 the Target Air Division and its associated companies as well as the aircraft workshop at Malmen were to be decommissioned, what meant the end of the whole unit. On June 26, 1997, a ceremony was held over the disbandment of the division, where, among other things, twelve J 32Es made a formation flight over Östergötland.

After the decommissioning of the division, however, the Lansens were still not ‘dead’ yet: the J 32D target tugs were kept operational by a private operator and received civil registrations, and eight flightworthy J 32Es were passed over to FMV:Prov (Provningsavdelningen vid Försvarets materielverk, the material testing department of the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen) to serve on, while other airframes without any more future potential were handed over to museums as exhibition pieces, or eventually scrapped. The surviving J 32Es served on in the electronic aggressor/trainer role until 1999 when they were finally replaced by ten modified Sk 37E Viggen two-seaters, after their development and conversion had taken longer than expected.

 

However, this was still not the end of the Saab 32, which turned out to be even more long-lived: By 2010, at least two Lansens were still operational, having the sole task of taking high altitude air samples for research purposes in collaboration with the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, and by 2012 a total of three Lansens reportedly remained in active service in Sweden.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 14.94 m (49 ft 0 in)

Wingspan: 13 m (42 ft 8 in)

Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 37.4 m² (403 sq ft)

Airfoil: NACA 64A010

Empty weight: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (29,762 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6A afterburning turbojet

(a Rolls Royce Avon Mk.47A outfitted with an indigenous afterburner),

delivering 4,88 kp dry and 6,500 kp with reheat

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,200 km/h (750 mph, 650 kn)

Range: 2,000 km (1,200 mi, 1,100 nmi) with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 100 m/s (20,000 ft/min)

 

Armament:

No internal weapons.

13× external hardpoints (five major pylons and eight more for light weapons)

for a wide variety of up to 3.000 kg of ordnance, typically only used

for ECM and chaff/flare dispenser pods and/or a conformal ventral auxiliary tank

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a what-if project that I had on my idea list for a long time, but never got the nerve to do it because it is just a mild modification – the model depicts a real aircraft type, just with a fictional livery for it (see below).

The plan to create a J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit from 1982 predated any OOB option, though. Tarangus has been offering a dedicated J 32B/E kit since 2016, but I stuck to my original plan to convert a Heller fighter bomber which I had in The Stash™, anyway)- also because I find the Tarangus kit prohibitively expensive (for what you get), even though it might have saved some work.

 

The Heller A 32A kit was basically built OOB, even though changing it into a J 32B (and even further into an “E”) called for some major modifications. These could have been scratched, but out of convenience I invested into a dedicated Maestro Models conversion set that offers resin replacements for a modified gun bay (which has more pronounced “cheek fairings” than the attack aircraft, the lower section is similar to the S 32C camera nose), a new jet exhaust and also the Lansen’s unique conformal belly tank – for the cost of a NIB Heller Saab 32 kit alone, though… :-/

Implanting the Maestro Models parts was straightforward and relatively easy. The J 32B gun bay replaces the OOB parts from the Heller kit, fits well and does not require more PSR than the original part. Since the model depicts a gun-less J 32E, I faired the gun ports over.

 

The RM6A exhaust was a bit more challenging – it is a bit longer and wider than the A 32A’s RM5. It’s not much, maybe 1mm in each dimension, so that the tail opening had to be widened and slightly re-contoured to accept the new one-piece resin pipe. The belly tank matched the kit’s ventral contours well. As an extra, the Maestro Models set also offers the J 32B’s different tail skid, which is placed further back on the fighter than on the attack and recce aircraft.

 

The J 32E’s characteristic collection of sizable blade antennae all around the hull was scratched from 0.5 mm styrene sheet. Furthermore, the flaps were lowered, an emergency fuel outlet was added under the tail, the canopy (very clear, but quite thick!) cut into two parts for optional open display, and the air intake walls were extended inside of the fuselage with styrene sheet.

 

Under the wings, four pylons (the Heller kit unfortunately comes totally devoid of any ordnance or even hardpoints!) from the spares box were added that carry scratched BOZ-1 chaff dispensers and a pair of ADRIAN/PETRUS ECM pod dummies – all made from drop tanks, incidentally from Swedish aircraft (Mistercraft Saab 35 and Matchbox Saab 29). Sure, there are short-run aftermarket sets for this special equipment that might come closer to the real thing(s), but I do not think that the (quite considerable) investments in all these exotic aftermarket items are worthwhile when most of them are pretty easy to scratch.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was the actual reason to build a J 32E: the fundamental plan was to build a Lansen in the Swedish air superiority low-viz two-tone paint scheme from the Nineties, and the IMHO only sensible option beyond pure fantasy was the real J 32E as “canvas”. I used JAS 39 Gripens as reference: their upper tone is called Pansargrå 5431-17M (“Tank Grey”, which is, according to trustworthy sources, very close to FS 36173, U.S. Neutral Grey), while the undersides are painted in Duvagrå 5431-14M (“Dove Grey”; approximately FS 36373, a tone called “High Low Visibility Light Grey”). Surprisingly, other Swedish types in low-viz livery used different shades; the JA 37s and late J 35Js were painted in tones called mörkgrå 033M and grå 032M, even though AJSF 37s and AFAIK a single SK 37 were painted with the Gripen colors, too.

 

After checking a lot of Gripen pictures I selected different tones, though, because the greys appear much lighter in real life, esp. on the lower surfaces. I ended up with FS 36231 (Dark Gull Grey, Humbrol 140, a bit lighter than the Neutral Grey) and RLM 63 (Lichtgrau, Testors 2077, a very pale and cold tone). The aircraft received a low waterline with a blurry edge, and the light grey was raised at the nose up to the radome, as seen on JA 37s and JAS 39s. To make the low-viz Lansen look a little less uniform I painted the lower rear section of the fuselage in Revell 91 and 99, simulating bare metal – a measure that had been done with many Lansens because leaking fuel and oil from the engine bay would wash off any paint in this area, leaving a rather tatty look. Di-electric fairings like the nose radome and the fin tip were painted with a brownish light grey (Revell 75) instead of black, reducing contrast and simulating bare and worn fiber glass. Small details like the white tips of the small wing fences and the underwing pylons were adapted from real-world Lansens.

 

After a light black ink wash, I emphasized single panels with Humbrol 125 and 165 on the upper surfaces and 147 and 196 underneath. Additionally, grinded graphite was used for weathering and a grimy look – an effective method, thanks to the kit’s fine raised panel lines. The silver wing leading edges were created with decal sheet material and not painted, a clean and convenient solution that avoids masking mess.

 

The ECM and chaff dispenser pods were painted in a slightly different shade of grey (FS 36440, Humbrol 40). As a subtle contrast the conformal belly tank was painted with Humbrol 247 (RLM 76), a tone that comes close to the Lansens’ standard camouflage from the Sixties’ green/blue livery, with a darker front end (Humbrol 145) and a bare metal tail section.

 

The cockpit interior was, according to pictures of real aircraft, painted in a greenish grey; I used Revell 67 (RAL 7009, Grüngrau) for most surfaces and slightly darker Humbrol 163 for dashboards and instrument panels. The landing gear wells as well as the flaps’ interior became Aluminum Bronze (Humbrol 56), while the landing gear struts were painted in a bluish dark green (Humbrol 195) with olive drab (Revell 46) wheel hubs - a detail seen on some real-life Saab 32s and a nice contrast to the light grey all around.

 

All markings/decals came from RBD Studio/Moose Republic aftermarket sheets for Saab 32 and 37. From the latter the low-viz national markings and the day-glo orange tactical codes were taken, while most stencils came from the Lansen sheet. Unfortunately, the Heller kit’s OOB sheet is pretty minimalistic – but the real A/S 32s did not carry many markings, anyway. Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish. As a confusing detail I gave the aircraft an explicit “16M” unit identifier, created with single black 4 mm letters/numbers. As a stark contrast and a modern peace-time element I also gave the Lansen the typical huge day-glo orange tactical codes on the upper wings that were carried by the Swedish interceptors of the time.

  

A relatively simple build, thanks to the resin conversion set – otherwise, creating a more or less believable J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit is a tough challenge. Though expensive, the parts fit and work well, and I’d recommend the set, because the shape of the J 32B’s lower nose is quite complex and scratching the bigger jet pipe needs a proper basis. The modern low-viz livery suits the vintage yet elegant Lansen well, even though it reveals the aircraft’s bulk and size; in all-grey, the Lansen has something shark- or even whale-ish to it? The aircraft/livery combo looks pretty exotic, but not uncredible - like a proven war horse.

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)

I just heard some pretty disturbing facts; people without pro-accounts can only post 200 pictures. I'm not capable of paying that, as I'm not old enough, according to the laws of my country.

So, either someoene needs to donate me a pro-account as a Christmas gift (:P), or I need to start posting fewer pics and deleting some as I go..

I've been deleting some old, bad shots, feel free to help me out by leaving a comment on the ones you think I should delete ;).

 

Anyway, I went walking with my camera today at sunset. This is one of the results - there's something about it I don't like about it though.. :)

 

This got to Explore as #236 on Monday, November 5, 2007.

 

View On Black

+++ 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:

In Autumn 1946, the Saab company began internal studies aimed at developing a replacement aircraft for the Saab B 18/S 18 as Sweden's standard attack aircraft. In 1948, Saab was formally approached by the Swedish Government with a request to investigate the development of a turbojet-powered strike aircraft to replace a series of 1940s vintage attack, reconnaissance, and night-fighter aircraft then in the Flygvapnet’s inventory. On 20 December 1948, a phase one contract for the design and mock-up of the proposed aircraft was issued. The requirements laid out by the Swedish Air Force were demanding: the aircraft had to be able to attack anywhere along Sweden's 2,000 km (1,245 miles) of coastline within one hour of launch from a central location, and it had to be capable of being launched in any weather conditions, at day or night.

 

In response, Saab elected to develop a twin-seat aircraft with a low-mounted swept wing and equipped with advanced electronics. On 3 November 1952, the first prototype, under the handle “Fpl 32” (flygplan = aircraft) conducted its first flight. A small batch of prototypes completed design and evaluation trials with series production of the newly designated Saab 32 Lansen beginning in 1953. The first production A 32A Lansen attack aircraft were delivered to the Swedish Air Force and proceeded through to mid-1958, at which point manufacturing activity switched to the Lansen’s other two major scheduled variants, the J 32B all-weather fighter and the photo reconnaissance S 32C, optimized for maritime operations.

 

The idea behind the J 32 originated from the late 1940s: Even before the SAAB 29 Tunnan had taken to the air, discussions began between SAAB and the Swedish Aviation Administration regarding a future night fighter aircraft with a jet engine. Since the end of the war, the Swedish Air Force had wanted a night fighter aircraft but was forced to put these on the shelf due to cost reasons. In the end, they managed to obtain sixty de Haviland Mosquito night fighter aircraft (then designated J 30) from Great Britain as a low-budget solution, but the J 30 was far from modern at the end of the 1940s and talks with SAAB regarding a domestic alternative continued.

At the beginning of the 1950s, the Fpl 32 project was in full swing and the aircraft was selected as the basis for an indigenous all-weather jet night fighter with a sighting radar and various heavier weapons to be able to shoot down bombers – at the time of the J 32B’s design, the main bomber threat was expected to enter Swedish airspace at subsonic speed and at high altitude. The original idea was that this aircraft would replace the J 30 Mosquito from 1955 onwards, but this proved to be impossible as the J 30 fleet needed to be replaced long before this and the A 32A as initial/main varia of the Fpl 32 had priority. Because of this operational gap, in January 1951 the Swedish Air Force ordered the British de Haviland Venom (then designated J 33) as an interim all-weather fighter and plans for the J 32B were postponed until later with the idea that the Lansen’s fighter variant would replace the J 33 at the end of the 1950s and benefit from technological progress until then.

 

On 7 January 1957, the first J 32B conducted its maiden flight, and it was a considerable step forward from the A 32A attack aircraft – in fact, excepts for the hull, it had only little in common with the attack variant! The new fighter version was powered by a Rolls-Royce Avon Mk 47A (locally designated RM6A) which gave as much thrust without an afterburner as the SAAB A 32A's original RM5A2 did with an afterburner, greatly improving the aircraft’s rate of climb and acceleration, even though the J 32B remained only transonic.

The armament consisted of four heavier fixed 30 mm ADEN m/55 automatic cannon in a slightly re-contoured nose, plus Rb 24/AIM-9B Sidewinder IR-guided AAMs and various unguided rockets against air and ground targets. Instead of the A 32A’s Ericsson mapping and navigation radar, which was compatible with the indigenous Rb 04C anti-ship missile, one of the earliest cruise missiles in western service, the J 32B carried a PS-42/A. This was a search/tracking X-band radar with a gyro-stabilized antenna with a swivel range of 60° to each side and +60°/−30° up/down. The radar featured the option of a 3D display for both WSO and pilot and its data could be directly displayed in the pilot’s Sikte 6A HUD, a very modern solution at the time.

 

A total of 118 aircraft (S/N 32501-32620) were produced between 1958 and 1960, serving in four fighter units. However, the J 32B only served for just under 12 years as a fighter aircraft in the Swedish Air Force: aviation technology progressed very quickly during the 1960s and already in 1966, the J 32B began to be replaced by the J 35F, which itself was already an advanced all-weather interceptor version of the supersonic Draken. In 1969 only the Jämtland's Air Flotilla (F4) still had the J 32B left in service and the type began to be completely retired from frontline service. In 1970 the plane flew in service for the last time and in 1973 the J 32B was officially phased out of the air force, and scrapping began in 1974.

 

However, the J 32Bs’ career was not over yet: At the beginning of the 1970s, Målflygdivisionen (MFD for short, the “Target Air Division”) was still using old J 29Fs as target tugs and for other training purposes, and they needed to be replaced. The choice fell on the much more capable, robust and readily available J 32B. Twenty-four machines were transferred to the MFD in 1971 to be used for training purposes, losing their radar and cannon armament. Six of these six J 32Bs were in 1972 modified into dedicated target tugs under the designation J 32D, six more J 32Bs were left unmodified and allocated to various second-line tasks such as radio testing and ground training.

The other twelve J 32Bs (s/n 32507, -510, -512, -515, -529, -541, -543, -569, -571, -592, -607 and -612) became jamming aircraft through the implementation of ECR equipment under the designation J 32E. This electronics package included internally:

- An INGEBORG signal reconnaissance receiver with antennae in the radome,

covering S, C and L radar frequency bands

- A G24 jamming transmitter, also with its antenna in the radome, covering alternatively

S, C and L frequency bands. This device co-operated with the external ADRIAN jamming pod

- Apparatus 91B; a broadband jammer, later integrated with INGEBORG

- MORE, a jammer and search station for the VHF and UHF bands

- FB-6 tape player/recorder; used, among other things, to send false messages/interference

Additional, external equipment included:

- PETRUS: jamming pod, X-band, also radar warning, intended for jamming aircraft

and active missile radars

- ADRIAN: jamming pod, active on S- and C-band, intended for jamming land-based and

shipboard radars

- BOZ-1, -3, -9 and -100 chaff dispenser pods

 

Outwardly, the J 32E differed from its brethren only through some blade antennae around the hull, and they initially retained the fighters’ blue-green paint scheme and their tactical markings so that they were hard to distinguish from the original fighters. Over time, orange day-glow markings were added to improve visibility during training sessions. However, during the mid-Nineties, three machines received during scheduled overhauls a new all-grey low-visibility camouflage with toned-down markings, and they received the “16M” unit identifier – the only MFD aircraft to carry these openly.

 

When a J 32E crashed in 1975, three of the remaining six training J 32Bs were modified into J 32Es in 1979 to fill the ranks. The MFD kept operating the small J 32Ds and Es fleet well into the Nineties and the special unit survived two flotilla and four defense engagements. At that time, the Målflygdivisionen was part of the Swedish Air Force’s Upplands Flygflottilj (F16), but it was based at Malmen air base near Linköpping (where the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen was located, too) as a detachment unit and therefore the machines received the unit identifier “F16M”, even though the “M” suffix did normally not appear on the aircraft. However, through a defense ministry decision in 1996 the Target Air Division and its associated companies as well as the aircraft workshop at Malmen were to be decommissioned, what meant the end of the whole unit. On June 26, 1997, a ceremony was held over the disbandment of the division, where, among other things, twelve J 32Es made a formation flight over Östergötland.

After the decommissioning of the division, however, the Lansens were still not ‘dead’ yet: the J 32D target tugs were kept operational by a private operator and received civil registrations, and eight flightworthy J 32Es were passed over to FMV:Prov (Provningsavdelningen vid Försvarets materielverk, the material testing department of the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen) to serve on, while other airframes without any more future potential were handed over to museums as exhibition pieces, or eventually scrapped. The surviving J 32Es served on in the electronic aggressor/trainer role until 1999 when they were finally replaced by ten modified Sk 37E Viggen two-seaters, after their development and conversion had taken longer than expected.

 

However, this was still not the end of the Saab 32, which turned out to be even more long-lived: By 2010, at least two Lansens were still operational, having the sole task of taking high altitude air samples for research purposes in collaboration with the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, and by 2012 a total of three Lansens reportedly remained in active service in Sweden.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 14.94 m (49 ft 0 in)

Wingspan: 13 m (42 ft 8 in)

Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 37.4 m² (403 sq ft)

Airfoil: NACA 64A010

Empty weight: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (29,762 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6A afterburning turbojet

(a Rolls Royce Avon Mk.47A outfitted with an indigenous afterburner),

delivering 4,88 kp dry and 6,500 kp with reheat

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,200 km/h (750 mph, 650 kn)

Range: 2,000 km (1,200 mi, 1,100 nmi) with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 100 m/s (20,000 ft/min)

 

Armament:

No internal weapons.

13× external hardpoints (five major pylons and eight more for light weapons)

for a wide variety of up to 3.000 kg of ordnance, typically only used

for ECM and chaff/flare dispenser pods and/or a conformal ventral auxiliary tank

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a what-if project that I had on my idea list for a long time, but never got the nerve to do it because it is just a mild modification – the model depicts a real aircraft type, just with a fictional livery for it (see below).

The plan to create a J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit from 1982 predated any OOB option, though. Tarangus has been offering a dedicated J 32B/E kit since 2016, but I stuck to my original plan to convert a Heller fighter bomber which I had in The Stash™, anyway)- also because I find the Tarangus kit prohibitively expensive (for what you get), even though it might have saved some work.

 

The Heller A 32A kit was basically built OOB, even though changing it into a J 32B (and even further into an “E”) called for some major modifications. These could have been scratched, but out of convenience I invested into a dedicated Maestro Models conversion set that offers resin replacements for a modified gun bay (which has more pronounced “cheek fairings” than the attack aircraft, the lower section is similar to the S 32C camera nose), a new jet exhaust and also the Lansen’s unique conformal belly tank – for the cost of a NIB Heller Saab 32 kit alone, though… :-/

Implanting the Maestro Models parts was straightforward and relatively easy. The J 32B gun bay replaces the OOB parts from the Heller kit, fits well and does not require more PSR than the original part. Since the model depicts a gun-less J 32E, I faired the gun ports over.

 

The RM6A exhaust was a bit more challenging – it is a bit longer and wider than the A 32A’s RM5. It’s not much, maybe 1mm in each dimension, so that the tail opening had to be widened and slightly re-contoured to accept the new one-piece resin pipe. The belly tank matched the kit’s ventral contours well. As an extra, the Maestro Models set also offers the J 32B’s different tail skid, which is placed further back on the fighter than on the attack and recce aircraft.

 

The J 32E’s characteristic collection of sizable blade antennae all around the hull was scratched from 0.5 mm styrene sheet. Furthermore, the flaps were lowered, an emergency fuel outlet was added under the tail, the canopy (very clear, but quite thick!) cut into two parts for optional open display, and the air intake walls were extended inside of the fuselage with styrene sheet.

 

Under the wings, four pylons (the Heller kit unfortunately comes totally devoid of any ordnance or even hardpoints!) from the spares box were added that carry scratched BOZ-1 chaff dispensers and a pair of ADRIAN/PETRUS ECM pod dummies – all made from drop tanks, incidentally from Swedish aircraft (Mistercraft Saab 35 and Matchbox Saab 29). Sure, there are short-run aftermarket sets for this special equipment that might come closer to the real thing(s), but I do not think that the (quite considerable) investments in all these exotic aftermarket items are worthwhile when most of them are pretty easy to scratch.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was the actual reason to build a J 32E: the fundamental plan was to build a Lansen in the Swedish air superiority low-viz two-tone paint scheme from the Nineties, and the IMHO only sensible option beyond pure fantasy was the real J 32E as “canvas”. I used JAS 39 Gripens as reference: their upper tone is called Pansargrå 5431-17M (“Tank Grey”, which is, according to trustworthy sources, very close to FS 36173, U.S. Neutral Grey), while the undersides are painted in Duvagrå 5431-14M (“Dove Grey”; approximately FS 36373, a tone called “High Low Visibility Light Grey”). Surprisingly, other Swedish types in low-viz livery used different shades; the JA 37s and late J 35Js were painted in tones called mörkgrå 033M and grå 032M, even though AJSF 37s and AFAIK a single SK 37 were painted with the Gripen colors, too.

 

After checking a lot of Gripen pictures I selected different tones, though, because the greys appear much lighter in real life, esp. on the lower surfaces. I ended up with FS 36231 (Dark Gull Grey, Humbrol 140, a bit lighter than the Neutral Grey) and RLM 63 (Lichtgrau, Testors 2077, a very pale and cold tone). The aircraft received a low waterline with a blurry edge, and the light grey was raised at the nose up to the radome, as seen on JA 37s and JAS 39s. To make the low-viz Lansen look a little less uniform I painted the lower rear section of the fuselage in Revell 91 and 99, simulating bare metal – a measure that had been done with many Lansens because leaking fuel and oil from the engine bay would wash off any paint in this area, leaving a rather tatty look. Di-electric fairings like the nose radome and the fin tip were painted with a brownish light grey (Revell 75) instead of black, reducing contrast and simulating bare and worn fiber glass. Small details like the white tips of the small wing fences and the underwing pylons were adapted from real-world Lansens.

 

After a light black ink wash, I emphasized single panels with Humbrol 125 and 165 on the upper surfaces and 147 and 196 underneath. Additionally, grinded graphite was used for weathering and a grimy look – an effective method, thanks to the kit’s fine raised panel lines. The silver wing leading edges were created with decal sheet material and not painted, a clean and convenient solution that avoids masking mess.

 

The ECM and chaff dispenser pods were painted in a slightly different shade of grey (FS 36440, Humbrol 40). As a subtle contrast the conformal belly tank was painted with Humbrol 247 (RLM 76), a tone that comes close to the Lansens’ standard camouflage from the Sixties’ green/blue livery, with a darker front end (Humbrol 145) and a bare metal tail section.

 

The cockpit interior was, according to pictures of real aircraft, painted in a greenish grey; I used Revell 67 (RAL 7009, Grüngrau) for most surfaces and slightly darker Humbrol 163 for dashboards and instrument panels. The landing gear wells as well as the flaps’ interior became Aluminum Bronze (Humbrol 56), while the landing gear struts were painted in a bluish dark green (Humbrol 195) with olive drab (Revell 46) wheel hubs - a detail seen on some real-life Saab 32s and a nice contrast to the light grey all around.

 

All markings/decals came from RBD Studio/Moose Republic aftermarket sheets for Saab 32 and 37. From the latter the low-viz national markings and the day-glo orange tactical codes were taken, while most stencils came from the Lansen sheet. Unfortunately, the Heller kit’s OOB sheet is pretty minimalistic – but the real A/S 32s did not carry many markings, anyway. Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish. As a confusing detail I gave the aircraft an explicit “16M” unit identifier, created with single black 4 mm letters/numbers. As a stark contrast and a modern peace-time element I also gave the Lansen the typical huge day-glo orange tactical codes on the upper wings that were carried by the Swedish interceptors of the time.

  

A relatively simple build, thanks to the resin conversion set – otherwise, creating a more or less believable J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit is a tough challenge. Though expensive, the parts fit and work well, and I’d recommend the set, because the shape of the J 32B’s lower nose is quite complex and scratching the bigger jet pipe needs a proper basis. The modern low-viz livery suits the vintage yet elegant Lansen well, even though it reveals the aircraft’s bulk and size; in all-grey, the Lansen has something shark- or even whale-ish to it? The aircraft/livery combo looks pretty exotic, but not uncredible - like a proven war horse.

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

I go round the cathedral again.

 

Initially at some of the memorials on the walls and the canopy of the pulpit, but it is the windows that are calling.

 

At least it was a bright, sunny day outside, which meant light was good in the cathedral with most shots coming out fine with no camera shake.

 

As I edit the shots I am stunned at the details of windows so high up they mostly seem like blocks of colour.

 

And so far, I have only just started to edit these shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

“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.”

Land art generator initiative. An instalation capable of energy generation.

collaboration between Lateral Office and Paisajes Emergentes.

  

WeatherField is a shape-shifting energy generation park along a strip of sandy beach in Abu Dhabi between Yas and Saadiyat Islands. The park is an open public space and is capable of harvesting the abundant renewable energy resource of wind within the Middle East context. The public park offers a variety of ways to engage with climate and renewable energy, as an economic sponsor, as a visual or physical experience, and as information.

 

Unlike current renewable energy fields where technologies are publicly inaccessible, static, and always on, WeatherField offers a range of public engagement dependent upon wind, sun, and moisture. Energy generation becomes a public performance, dynamic, reactive, and interactive. The park is active when weather events are active, and calm when weather is calm, in each instance offering the public a compatible experiences.

Paisajes Emergentes: Luis Callejas, Sebastián Mejia, Edgar mazo, Alexander Laing

Lateral Office: Mason White, Lola Sheppard, Matthew Spremulli, and Fei-Ling Tseng.

+++ 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:

In Autumn 1946, the Saab company began internal studies aimed at developing a replacement aircraft for the Saab B 18/S 18 as Sweden's standard attack aircraft. In 1948, Saab was formally approached by the Swedish Government with a request to investigate the development of a turbojet-powered strike aircraft to replace a series of 1940s vintage attack, reconnaissance, and night-fighter aircraft then in the Flygvapnet’s inventory. On 20 December 1948, a phase one contract for the design and mock-up of the proposed aircraft was issued. The requirements laid out by the Swedish Air Force were demanding: the aircraft had to be able to attack anywhere along Sweden's 2,000 km (1,245 miles) of coastline within one hour of launch from a central location, and it had to be capable of being launched in any weather conditions, at day or night.

 

In response, Saab elected to develop a twin-seat aircraft with a low-mounted swept wing and equipped with advanced electronics. On 3 November 1952, the first prototype, under the handle “Fpl 32” (flygplan = aircraft) conducted its first flight. A small batch of prototypes completed design and evaluation trials with series production of the newly designated Saab 32 Lansen beginning in 1953. The first production A 32A Lansen attack aircraft were delivered to the Swedish Air Force and proceeded through to mid-1958, at which point manufacturing activity switched to the Lansen’s other two major scheduled variants, the J 32B all-weather fighter and the photo reconnaissance S 32C, optimized for maritime operations.

 

The idea behind the J 32 originated from the late 1940s: Even before the SAAB 29 Tunnan had taken to the air, discussions began between SAAB and the Swedish Aviation Administration regarding a future night fighter aircraft with a jet engine. Since the end of the war, the Swedish Air Force had wanted a night fighter aircraft but was forced to put these on the shelf due to cost reasons. In the end, they managed to obtain sixty de Haviland Mosquito night fighter aircraft (then designated J 30) from Great Britain as a low-budget solution, but the J 30 was far from modern at the end of the 1940s and talks with SAAB regarding a domestic alternative continued.

At the beginning of the 1950s, the Fpl 32 project was in full swing and the aircraft was selected as the basis for an indigenous all-weather jet night fighter with a sighting radar and various heavier weapons to be able to shoot down bombers – at the time of the J 32B’s design, the main bomber threat was expected to enter Swedish airspace at subsonic speed and at high altitude. The original idea was that this aircraft would replace the J 30 Mosquito from 1955 onwards, but this proved to be impossible as the J 30 fleet needed to be replaced long before this and the A 32A as initial/main varia of the Fpl 32 had priority. Because of this operational gap, in January 1951 the Swedish Air Force ordered the British de Haviland Venom (then designated J 33) as an interim all-weather fighter and plans for the J 32B were postponed until later with the idea that the Lansen’s fighter variant would replace the J 33 at the end of the 1950s and benefit from technological progress until then.

 

On 7 January 1957, the first J 32B conducted its maiden flight, and it was a considerable step forward from the A 32A attack aircraft – in fact, excepts for the hull, it had only little in common with the attack variant! The new fighter version was powered by a Rolls-Royce Avon Mk 47A (locally designated RM6A) which gave as much thrust without an afterburner as the SAAB A 32A's original RM5A2 did with an afterburner, greatly improving the aircraft’s rate of climb and acceleration, even though the J 32B remained only transonic.

The armament consisted of four heavier fixed 30 mm ADEN m/55 automatic cannon in a slightly re-contoured nose, plus Rb 24/AIM-9B Sidewinder IR-guided AAMs and various unguided rockets against air and ground targets. Instead of the A 32A’s Ericsson mapping and navigation radar, which was compatible with the indigenous Rb 04C anti-ship missile, one of the earliest cruise missiles in western service, the J 32B carried a PS-42/A. This was a search/tracking X-band radar with a gyro-stabilized antenna with a swivel range of 60° to each side and +60°/−30° up/down. The radar featured the option of a 3D display for both WSO and pilot and its data could be directly displayed in the pilot’s Sikte 6A HUD, a very modern solution at the time.

 

A total of 118 aircraft (S/N 32501-32620) were produced between 1958 and 1960, serving in four fighter units. However, the J 32B only served for just under 12 years as a fighter aircraft in the Swedish Air Force: aviation technology progressed very quickly during the 1960s and already in 1966, the J 32B began to be replaced by the J 35F, which itself was already an advanced all-weather interceptor version of the supersonic Draken. In 1969 only the Jämtland's Air Flotilla (F4) still had the J 32B left in service and the type began to be completely retired from frontline service. In 1970 the plane flew in service for the last time and in 1973 the J 32B was officially phased out of the air force, and scrapping began in 1974.

 

However, the J 32Bs’ career was not over yet: At the beginning of the 1970s, Målflygdivisionen (MFD for short, the “Target Air Division”) was still using old J 29Fs as target tugs and for other training purposes, and they needed to be replaced. The choice fell on the much more capable, robust and readily available J 32B. Twenty-four machines were transferred to the MFD in 1971 to be used for training purposes, losing their radar and cannon armament. Six of these six J 32Bs were in 1972 modified into dedicated target tugs under the designation J 32D, six more J 32Bs were left unmodified and allocated to various second-line tasks such as radio testing and ground training.

The other twelve J 32Bs (s/n 32507, -510, -512, -515, -529, -541, -543, -569, -571, -592, -607 and -612) became jamming aircraft through the implementation of ECR equipment under the designation J 32E. This electronics package included internally:

- An INGEBORG signal reconnaissance receiver with antennae in the radome,

covering S, C and L radar frequency bands

- A G24 jamming transmitter, also with its antenna in the radome, covering alternatively

S, C and L frequency bands. This device co-operated with the external ADRIAN jamming pod

- Apparatus 91B; a broadband jammer, later integrated with INGEBORG

- MORE, a jammer and search station for the VHF and UHF bands

- FB-6 tape player/recorder; used, among other things, to send false messages/interference

Additional, external equipment included:

- PETRUS: jamming pod, X-band, also radar warning, intended for jamming aircraft

and active missile radars

- ADRIAN: jamming pod, active on S- and C-band, intended for jamming land-based and

shipboard radars

- BOZ-1, -3, -9 and -100 chaff dispenser pods

 

Outwardly, the J 32E differed from its brethren only through some blade antennae around the hull, and they initially retained the fighters’ blue-green paint scheme and their tactical markings so that they were hard to distinguish from the original fighters. Over time, orange day-glow markings were added to improve visibility during training sessions. However, during the mid-Nineties, three machines received during scheduled overhauls a new all-grey low-visibility camouflage with toned-down markings, and they received the “16M” unit identifier – the only MFD aircraft to carry these openly.

 

When a J 32E crashed in 1975, three of the remaining six training J 32Bs were modified into J 32Es in 1979 to fill the ranks. The MFD kept operating the small J 32Ds and Es fleet well into the Nineties and the special unit survived two flotilla and four defense engagements. At that time, the Målflygdivisionen was part of the Swedish Air Force’s Upplands Flygflottilj (F16), but it was based at Malmen air base near Linköpping (where the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen was located, too) as a detachment unit and therefore the machines received the unit identifier “F16M”, even though the “M” suffix did normally not appear on the aircraft. However, through a defense ministry decision in 1996 the Target Air Division and its associated companies as well as the aircraft workshop at Malmen were to be decommissioned, what meant the end of the whole unit. On June 26, 1997, a ceremony was held over the disbandment of the division, where, among other things, twelve J 32Es made a formation flight over Östergötland.

After the decommissioning of the division, however, the Lansens were still not ‘dead’ yet: the J 32D target tugs were kept operational by a private operator and received civil registrations, and eight flightworthy J 32Es were passed over to FMV:Prov (Provningsavdelningen vid Försvarets materielverk, the material testing department of the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen) to serve on, while other airframes without any more future potential were handed over to museums as exhibition pieces, or eventually scrapped. The surviving J 32Es served on in the electronic aggressor/trainer role until 1999 when they were finally replaced by ten modified Sk 37E Viggen two-seaters, after their development and conversion had taken longer than expected.

 

However, this was still not the end of the Saab 32, which turned out to be even more long-lived: By 2010, at least two Lansens were still operational, having the sole task of taking high altitude air samples for research purposes in collaboration with the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, and by 2012 a total of three Lansens reportedly remained in active service in Sweden.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 14.94 m (49 ft 0 in)

Wingspan: 13 m (42 ft 8 in)

Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 37.4 m² (403 sq ft)

Airfoil: NACA 64A010

Empty weight: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (29,762 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6A afterburning turbojet

(a Rolls Royce Avon Mk.47A outfitted with an indigenous afterburner),

delivering 4,88 kp dry and 6,500 kp with reheat

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,200 km/h (750 mph, 650 kn)

Range: 2,000 km (1,200 mi, 1,100 nmi) with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 100 m/s (20,000 ft/min)

 

Armament:

No internal weapons.

13× external hardpoints (five major pylons and eight more for light weapons)

for a wide variety of up to 3.000 kg of ordnance, typically only used

for ECM and chaff/flare dispenser pods and/or a conformal ventral auxiliary tank

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a what-if project that I had on my idea list for a long time, but never got the nerve to do it because it is just a mild modification – the model depicts a real aircraft type, just with a fictional livery for it (see below).

The plan to create a J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit from 1982 predated any OOB option, though. Tarangus has been offering a dedicated J 32B/E kit since 2016, but I stuck to my original plan to convert a Heller fighter bomber which I had in The Stash™, anyway)- also because I find the Tarangus kit prohibitively expensive (for what you get), even though it might have saved some work.

 

The Heller A 32A kit was basically built OOB, even though changing it into a J 32B (and even further into an “E”) called for some major modifications. These could have been scratched, but out of convenience I invested into a dedicated Maestro Models conversion set that offers resin replacements for a modified gun bay (which has more pronounced “cheek fairings” than the attack aircraft, the lower section is similar to the S 32C camera nose), a new jet exhaust and also the Lansen’s unique conformal belly tank – for the cost of a NIB Heller Saab 32 kit alone, though… :-/

Implanting the Maestro Models parts was straightforward and relatively easy. The J 32B gun bay replaces the OOB parts from the Heller kit, fits well and does not require more PSR than the original part. Since the model depicts a gun-less J 32E, I faired the gun ports over.

 

The RM6A exhaust was a bit more challenging – it is a bit longer and wider than the A 32A’s RM5. It’s not much, maybe 1mm in each dimension, so that the tail opening had to be widened and slightly re-contoured to accept the new one-piece resin pipe. The belly tank matched the kit’s ventral contours well. As an extra, the Maestro Models set also offers the J 32B’s different tail skid, which is placed further back on the fighter than on the attack and recce aircraft.

 

The J 32E’s characteristic collection of sizable blade antennae all around the hull was scratched from 0.5 mm styrene sheet. Furthermore, the flaps were lowered, an emergency fuel outlet was added under the tail, the canopy (very clear, but quite thick!) cut into two parts for optional open display, and the air intake walls were extended inside of the fuselage with styrene sheet.

 

Under the wings, four pylons (the Heller kit unfortunately comes totally devoid of any ordnance or even hardpoints!) from the spares box were added that carry scratched BOZ-1 chaff dispensers and a pair of ADRIAN/PETRUS ECM pod dummies – all made from drop tanks, incidentally from Swedish aircraft (Mistercraft Saab 35 and Matchbox Saab 29). Sure, there are short-run aftermarket sets for this special equipment that might come closer to the real thing(s), but I do not think that the (quite considerable) investments in all these exotic aftermarket items are worthwhile when most of them are pretty easy to scratch.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was the actual reason to build a J 32E: the fundamental plan was to build a Lansen in the Swedish air superiority low-viz two-tone paint scheme from the Nineties, and the IMHO only sensible option beyond pure fantasy was the real J 32E as “canvas”. I used JAS 39 Gripens as reference: their upper tone is called Pansargrå 5431-17M (“Tank Grey”, which is, according to trustworthy sources, very close to FS 36173, U.S. Neutral Grey), while the undersides are painted in Duvagrå 5431-14M (“Dove Grey”; approximately FS 36373, a tone called “High Low Visibility Light Grey”). Surprisingly, other Swedish types in low-viz livery used different shades; the JA 37s and late J 35Js were painted in tones called mörkgrå 033M and grå 032M, even though AJSF 37s and AFAIK a single SK 37 were painted with the Gripen colors, too.

 

After checking a lot of Gripen pictures I selected different tones, though, because the greys appear much lighter in real life, esp. on the lower surfaces. I ended up with FS 36231 (Dark Gull Grey, Humbrol 140, a bit lighter than the Neutral Grey) and RLM 63 (Lichtgrau, Testors 2077, a very pale and cold tone). The aircraft received a low waterline with a blurry edge, and the light grey was raised at the nose up to the radome, as seen on JA 37s and JAS 39s. To make the low-viz Lansen look a little less uniform I painted the lower rear section of the fuselage in Revell 91 and 99, simulating bare metal – a measure that had been done with many Lansens because leaking fuel and oil from the engine bay would wash off any paint in this area, leaving a rather tatty look. Di-electric fairings like the nose radome and the fin tip were painted with a brownish light grey (Revell 75) instead of black, reducing contrast and simulating bare and worn fiber glass. Small details like the white tips of the small wing fences and the underwing pylons were adapted from real-world Lansens.

 

After a light black ink wash, I emphasized single panels with Humbrol 125 and 165 on the upper surfaces and 147 and 196 underneath. Additionally, grinded graphite was used for weathering and a grimy look – an effective method, thanks to the kit’s fine raised panel lines. The silver wing leading edges were created with decal sheet material and not painted, a clean and convenient solution that avoids masking mess.

 

The ECM and chaff dispenser pods were painted in a slightly different shade of grey (FS 36440, Humbrol 40). As a subtle contrast the conformal belly tank was painted with Humbrol 247 (RLM 76), a tone that comes close to the Lansens’ standard camouflage from the Sixties’ green/blue livery, with a darker front end (Humbrol 145) and a bare metal tail section.

 

The cockpit interior was, according to pictures of real aircraft, painted in a greenish grey; I used Revell 67 (RAL 7009, Grüngrau) for most surfaces and slightly darker Humbrol 163 for dashboards and instrument panels. The landing gear wells as well as the flaps’ interior became Aluminum Bronze (Humbrol 56), while the landing gear struts were painted in a bluish dark green (Humbrol 195) with olive drab (Revell 46) wheel hubs - a detail seen on some real-life Saab 32s and a nice contrast to the light grey all around.

 

All markings/decals came from RBD Studio/Moose Republic aftermarket sheets for Saab 32 and 37. From the latter the low-viz national markings and the day-glo orange tactical codes were taken, while most stencils came from the Lansen sheet. Unfortunately, the Heller kit’s OOB sheet is pretty minimalistic – but the real A/S 32s did not carry many markings, anyway. Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish. As a confusing detail I gave the aircraft an explicit “16M” unit identifier, created with single black 4 mm letters/numbers. As a stark contrast and a modern peace-time element I also gave the Lansen the typical huge day-glo orange tactical codes on the upper wings that were carried by the Swedish interceptors of the time.

  

A relatively simple build, thanks to the resin conversion set – otherwise, creating a more or less believable J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit is a tough challenge. Though expensive, the parts fit and work well, and I’d recommend the set, because the shape of the J 32B’s lower nose is quite complex and scratching the bigger jet pipe needs a proper basis. The modern low-viz livery suits the vintage yet elegant Lansen well, even though it reveals the aircraft’s bulk and size; in all-grey, the Lansen has something shark- or even whale-ish to it? The aircraft/livery combo looks pretty exotic, but not uncredible - like a proven war horse.

HMAS Darwin is a long-range escort frigate that undertakes roles including area air defence, anti-submarine warfare, surveillance, reconnaissance and interdiction. The ship is capable of countering simultaneous threats from the air, surface and sub-surface.

 

The class are modified variants of the American Oliver Hazard Perry-class FFG-7 frigates. Darwin and her five sister ships, Adelaide, Canberra, Sydney, Melbourne and Newcastle were the first RAN ships to be powered by gas turbines for their main propulsion. This, combined with a modern repair by replacement policy, has allowed both a reduced complement and a high availability for sea.

 

Darwin can be underway from cold in 30 minutes. In addition, two forward-mounted retractable auxiliary propulsion units provide a secondary means of propulsion plus excellent manoeuvrability in confined waters.

 

Darwin's principal weapons are the Standard medium-range SAM and Harpoon anti-ship missile, both of which are launched from the Mk 13 launcher on the forecastle. A 76mm gun to counter both aircraft and surface threats is fitted forward of the funnel and one 20 mm Phalanx CIWS for anti-missile defence is located above the helicopter hangars.

 

For long-range ASW tasks, Darwin is equipped for two Sikorsky S-70B-2 Seahawk helicopters. They are all-weather, twin-engine helicopters with a crew of three. Their primary role is undersea warfare for which they carry sonobuoys and up to two torpedoes. Other roles include OTHT, surveillance, boarding support, SAR and utility operations. For close-in ASW defence the ship is fitted with two Mk 32 triple torpedo tubes.

 

The ship's sensor package includes long-range radars for air and surface surveillance, ESM sensors and the Australian Nulka anti-ship missile defence system. Darwin is also fitted with the EO Tracking System (EOTS) with combined optical and IR sensors for detection and tracking. An Australian software based command and control system processes information as well as target data linked from other ships and aircraft.

 

Darwin was laid down by Todd Pacific Shipyards at Seattle, WA in 1981 and commissioned into the RAN on 21 July 1984. Here she is seen alongside in Woolloomooloo at the RAN's Fleet Base East in Sydney Harbour.

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.

At the beginning of the Cold War, the Royal Canadian Air Force relied mostly on Canadair-built F-86 Sabres for defense of Canada. While the F-86 was a very capable aircraft, it was not suited to intercepting Soviet bombers in the extreme weather conditions of northern Canada, nor did it have the range to patrol the second-largest country in the world.

 

With this in mind, Avro Canada embarked on a crash program to design and build an interceptor with the necessary range, armament, and all-weather capability needed. The resulting CF-100 Canuck was a simple but effective design. While comparatively slow and unmanueverable compared to the Sabre—earning the CF-100 nicknames such as “Clunk,” “CF-Zero,” “Zilch,” and “Beast” for its lack of maneuverability—the Canuck was reliable and well-suited to poor weather. For awhile, the CF-100 was the only NATO fighter capable of operating in all weathers, and the USAF briefly considered adopting it for use over Korea; Belgium was to adopt the design in 1957.

 

The CF-100 was to go through several variants, though all kept the same basic straight-wing design. Initial versions of the Canuck, the Mk.3 and Mk. 4, entered service in 1953 and were armed with eight Browning M2 .50 caliber machine guns. As these were considered insufficient to bring down a heavy bomber, the Mk.4A added 58 Mighty Mouse rockets in wingtip pods; the Mk.5 deleted the machine guns entirely for rocket-only armament. The Canuck Mk.6 would have deleted the rocket pods in favor of AIM-7 Sparrow missiles, but this was cancelled as the CF-100 was scheduled to be replaced in the mid-1960s with the CF-105 Arrow. When the Arrow itself was cancelled, the Canuck was instead replaced by the CF-101 Voodoo, though a small number continued in service as trainers and electronic warfare aircraft until 1981, when it was finally withdrawn. 692 CF-100s were built, and today 26 remain in museums.

 

This CF-100, 100779, is a Mk.5, delivered in 1959 to 416 Squadron at CFB Cold Lake, Alberta. It served with 416 Squadron and 425 Squadron at CFB Bagotville, Quebec until 1970, when it was converted to an ECM training aircraft. When it was retired in 1976, it was donated to the Peterson AFB airpark (today the Peterson Air and Space Museum), which honors NORAD interceptors. It retains the knight's-helmet emblem of 414 Squadron, its last squadron assignment, based at North Bay, Ontario, and carries the earlier bilingual "Canadian Armed Forces/Forces Armees Canadiennes" used by the CAF in the late 1960s. The overall ADC gray was not used by CF-100s, but in this case is there to preserve the airframe.

 

This is the second picture I've taken of 100779; the first was taken in 1983 from the opposite angle. 40 years separate the two pictures. Here's the 1983 version: www.flickr.com/photos/31469080@N07/34567603212/in/photoli...

   

+++ 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 ASTA (Aerospace Technologies of Australia, formerly Government Aircraft Factories) Baza development was started in 1995 when the Royal Australian Air Force was searching for a two-seat training aircraft that would allow the transition from initial training on piston-engined aircraft to jets, and could also be used for weapon training and CAS/reconnaissance duties.

 

ASTA responded with a low-wing two-turboprop-engined all-metal monoplane with retractable landing gear, capable of operating from unprepared strips when operationally required. The aircraft, internally coded “A-31”, was of conventional, all-metal (mainly duralumin) construction. The unswept cantilever wings have 3° of dihedral and are fitted with slotted trailing-edge flaps.

 

The A-31 had a tandem cockpit arrangement; the crew of two was seated under the upward opening clamshell canopy on Martin-Baker Mk 6AP6A zero/zero ejection seats and were provided with dual controls.

 

Armor plating was fitted to protect the crew and engines from hostile ground fire. The aircraft was powered by a pair of Garrett TPE 331 engines, driving sets of three-bladed propellers which were also capable of being used as air brakes.

 

The A-31 was designed for operations from short, rough airstrips.[The retractable tricycle landing gear, with a single nose wheel and twin main wheels retracting into the engine nacelles, is therefore fitted with low pressure tires to suit operations on rough ground, while the undercarriage legs are tall to give good clearance for underslung weapon loads. The undercarriage, flaps and brakes are operated hydraulically, with no pneumatic systems.

 

Two JATO rockets can be fitted under the fuselage to allow extra-short take-off.

Fuel is fed from two fuselage tanks of combined capacity of 800 L (180 imp gal; 210 US gal) and two self-sealing tanks of 460 L (100 imp gal; 120 US gal) in the wings.

 

Fixed armament of the A-31 consisted of two 30mm Aden cannons mounted under the cockpits with 200 rounds each. A total of nine hardpoints were fitted for the carriage of external stores such as bombs, rockets or external fuel tanks, with one of 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) capacity mounted under the fuselage and the remaining two pairs of 500 kg (1,100 lb) capacity beneath the wing roots and wings inside of the engine nacelles, and two more pairs of hardpoints outside of the engines for another 500 kg and 227 kg, respectively. Total external weapons load was limited to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg) of weapons, though.

Onboard armaments were aimed by a simple reflector sight, since no all weather/night capabilities were called for – even though provisions were made that external sensors could be carried (e. g. a TISEO or a PAVE Spike pod).

 

Severe competition arose through the BAe Hawk, though: the Royal Australian Air Force ordered 33 Hawk 127 Lead-in Fighters (LIFs) in June 1997, 12 of which were produced in the UK and 21 in Australia – and this procurement severely hampered the A-31’s progress. The initial plan to build 66 aircraft for domestic use, with prospects for export, e. g. to Sri Lanka, Indonesia or Turkey, was cut down to a mere 32 aircraft which were to be used in conjunction with the Australian Army in the FAC role and against mobile ground targets.

 

This extended role required an upgrade with additional avionics, an optional forward looking infrared (FLIR) sensor and a laser ranger in an extended nose section, which lead to the Mk. II configuration - effectively, only five machines were produced as Mk.I types, and they were updated to Mk. II configuration even before delivery to the RAAF in August 1999.

 

Since then, the ASTA A-31 has been used in concunction with RAAF's Pilatus PC-9 and BAe Hawk Mk. 127 trainers. Beyond educational duties the type is also employed for Fleet support to Navy operations and for close air support to Army operations.

 

The 'Baza' (christened by a small sized bird of prey found in the forests of South Asia and Southeast Asia) has even seen serious military duty and already fired in anger: since August 2007, a detachment of No. 114 Mobile Control and Reporting Unit RAAF has been on active service at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan, and a constant detachment of six A-31's from RAAF 76 Suqadron has been assigned to armed reconnaissance and protection of approximately 75 personnel deployed with the AN/TPS-77 radar, assigned the responsibility to co-ordinate coalition air operations.

  

General characteristics

Crew: 2

Length (incl. Pitot): 14.69 m (48 ft 1 ½ in)

Wingspan: 14.97 m (49 ft)

Height: 3, 75 m (12 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 30.30 m2 (326.1 sq ft)

Aspect ratio: 6.9:1

Airfoil: NACA 642A215 at root, NACA641 at tip

Empty weight: 4,020 kg (8,863 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 6,800 kg (14,991 lb)

Internal fuel capacity: 1,280 L (280 imp gal; 340 US gal)

 

Powerplant:

2 × Garrett TPE 331-11U-601G turboprop engines, 820 kW (1.100 hp) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 515 km/h (311 mph; 270 kn) at 4.570 m (15.000 ft)

Cruising speed: 430 km/h (267 mph; 232 kn) at 2.500 m (8.200 ft)

Stall speed: 143 km/h (89 mph; 77 kn) (flaps and undercarriage down)

Never exceed speed: 750 km/h (466 mph; 405 kn)

Range:1.611 km (1.000 mi; 868 nmi), clean and internal fuel only

Ferry range: 3,710 km (2,305 mi; 2,003 nmi) max internal and external fuel

Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,808 ft)

g limits: +6/-3 g

Rate of climb: 6.5 m/s (1.276 ft/min)

 

Armament

2× 30 mm ADEN cannons in the lower nose

Up to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg) of weapons on nine external hardpoints

  

The kit and its assembly:

Like many of my whifs, this was spawned by a project at whatifmodelers.com from fellow user silverwindblade that ran under the handle "COIN aircraft from a Hawk" - and in fact, the BAe Hawk's fuselage with its staggered cockpit and good field of view appears as a good basis for a conversion.

 

I liked the idea VERY much, and while silverwindblade's work would rather develop into a futuristic canard layout aircraft, I decided to keep the COIN aircraft rather conservative - the FMA 58 'Pucara' from Argentina would be a proper benchmark.

 

The basis here is the Italeri BAe Hawk Mk. 127 kit which comes with the longer nose and modified wings for the RAAF version, as well as with false decals.

Anyway, I'd only use the fuselage, anything else is implanted, partly from unlikely donation kits! Wings incl. engine nacelles and stablizers come from the vintage box scale (1:166?) Revell Convair R3Y-2 Tradewind flying boat(!), the fin from an Academy OV-10 Bronco.

The landing gear was puzzled together, among other from parts of a 1:200 Concorde, the propellers were scratched.

 

Biggest mod to the fuselage is the dissection of the air intakes (and their blending with the fuselage) as well as a new tail section where the Adour jet engine's exhaust had been.

  

Painting and markings:

This model was agood excuse to finally apply an SIOP color scheme, which was originally carried by USAF's strategic bombers like B-52 or FB-111. But what actually inspired me were Australian C-130s - it took some time to figure out that their scheme were the USAF's SIOP colors (FS 34201, 34159 and 34079). But that made the Baza's potential user's choice (and fictional origin) easy.

 

As a COIN role aircraft I settled on a wraparound scheme. I found a pattern scheme on an USN Aggerssor A-4 Skyhawk that had been painted in SIOP colors, too, and adapted it for the model. Basic colors were Humbrol 31, 84 and 116, good approximations - the result looks odd, but suits the Baza well.

 

Later, panels were emphasized through dry painting with lighter shades and a light black ink wash was applied.

 

The landing gear became classic white, the cockpit interior medium gray - nothing fancy.

 

The markings were improvised - the Italeri Hawk Mk. 127 features RAAF 'roos, but these are printed in black - wrong for the OOB kit, but very welcome on my aircraft. The rest was salvaged from the scrap box, the tactical code A-31-06 created with single letters from TL Modellbau.

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 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.

By 1981 I considered myself quite capable of getting around the Network with relative ease. So much so that I had no reservations whatsoever at promising to take my girlfriend at the time (now my lovely wife) to the shopping delights of Birmingham's Bullring (I know what you're thinking - but like I said I was still trying to impress my lady!).

Anyway. For anyone who's not familiar with the cross-country workings of the time, the mechanics of getting from Pompey to Birmingham usually involved changes at Fareham, Eastleigh and Basingstoke before arrival at Reading where one could board an inter-regional from Weymouth/Poole/Brighton or Bournemouth. These services always ran round at Reading.

My issue on the day was that a northbound and southbound service were due to arrive at the same time. You can see where this is going, can't you?

I (quite full of bravado and brazen knowledge) took my ladies arm and led her straight onto our Birmingham-bound train. You can imagine my horror as we left Reading and turned left. Straight back to Basingstoke!

It's the only time I've ever caught the wrong train in 40-odd years, but Pete (my brother) has never ever let me forget it!

 

47145 is seen here hurtling towards the Capital with what I recorded as an ECS working on my first visit to Reading that morning.

 

47145 went on to become Tinsley's pet engine (receiving all kinds of special paint jobs and pretty names) but sadly went the same way as her parent depot. Withdrawn in February 2007, she was turned to razor blades at TJ Thomson's yard in Stockton during August 2009. RIP.

+++ 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.

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 :-)

An overloaded Mummy wagon. Thank goodness for high level brake lights eh?

 

A stoopid question on a forum: "Does anyone know whether it is illegal to obscure your rear number plate with bikes hanging from a rack? I expect it is - but I do it and see lots of other drivers/cyclists doing it so I wonder if a blind eye is turned to the practice."

 

Best answer: "Police regularly used to pull people up for this at the car parks at Rutland Water - you should have a trailer light board to diaply number plate - properly capable of illumination and easily seen rear lights. Dont forget if you obscure your stop lights it is your bikes which get squashed first when someone runs in to the back of you. The problem is of couse unless you have a tow bar you are unlikeley to have the necessary socket for the extra lights."

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.

Working a service from Gothenburg to Copenhagen, SJ X2000 93-74-302 stands at the buffers under the incredible Malmö train station prior to reversing out and heading towards the Danish capital over the Øresund Bridge.

 

Often considered the train that saved Swedish Railways, the X2000, also known as the X2, was launched in 1990 by Kalmar Verkstad in Kalmar, Sweden (prior to the company being bought by Adtranz in 1996). The X2000, and its top speed of 130mph in service (though technically capable of 176mph), massively reduced journey times and increased service efficiency throughout the mid-1990's, its effects on Swedish Railways and its passenger numbers being similar to that of the HST here in the UK.

 

The X2000 design goes back to the mid-1980's, and, in similar fashion to the Pendolino of Italy, took much of its innovation from the failure of the British Advanced Passenger Train (APT). Following the cancellation of the APT in 1986, much of the information and technology developed was taken up by Italy, who pioneered the first revenue earning tilting-train in 1987 with the ETR 450.

 

The success of the ETR 450 meant that SJ, who at the time were suffering from very slow and somewhat unreliable services on the country's very winding railway network, could also take up their design innovation to help redress the balance. During the period of the X2000's construction, the Swedish Government desired something home-built, and were reluctant to buy Pendolino's from Italy. Thus the contract for building the X2000 sets was given to Kalmar Verkstad.

 

The X2000 was launched in 1990 as an entirely first-class train working the premier route between Stockholm and Gothenburg, and immediately had a pronounced effect on the railway services. However, all was not well with the X2000, due largely to some electrical infidelity. As such, widespread distribution of the sets was not completed until at least 1995, after which second-class was also made available so as to help recoup the lost train's lost profits.

 

Production ended in 1996 following the purchase of Kalmar Verkstad by German rail transport equipment manufacturer Adtranz. Today the sets have been distributed heavily around Sweden, even operating international services to Copenhagen. However, the X2000 became a failure of its own success in some respects, especially with the increased ridership on SJ trains. As popularity of train travel rose in the 2000's, not only did capacity aboard the trains become an issue, the capacity on the railways themselves was becoming problematic, with journey times becoming longer and delays being incurred. This issue was rectified in 2008 with the order of the Bombardier X55 Regina high-speed units that have helped compliment the X2000's on their long distance services.

 

The X2000 however has not just been limited to Sweden, they've also made ventures to international railways with mixed amounts of success.

 

The first county to take interest in the X2000 was interestingly enough the United States, as, in the 1990's, Amtrak decided to modernise the high speed Northeast Corridor service between Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. The option was also made for diesel variants to operate on non-electrified services around the USA, especially higher-capacity services around California or to the north of New York towards Albany and Buffalo, with the X2000 set being dragged around 48 states by pairs of F40 locomotives.

 

The set was tested between October 1992 and January 1993, together with a more traditional ICE set from Germany, with both sets being compared for their operational efficiency and increased performance. Though a good contender for Amtrak services, the X2000's electrical faults sadly put it out of the running. Eventually Amtrak would choose the Acela sets built by Bombardier in 2000.

 

In 1995, three X2000 cars were hired by Australian operator CountryLink for evaluation purposes, being one driving trailer, one bistro car and one first class car. The trains were towed in a push/pull operation by modified XPT power cars XP2000 and XP2009 with the tilt equipment deactivated. After conducting a statewide of New South Wales tour in March 1995, they were used on Canberra services from April 1995 until June 1995.

 

China also purchased a X2000 train named "Xinshisu" (New Speed). The train served as Guangzhou-Kowloon Through Train on the Guangshen Railway from 1998 until 2007. It was delivered to Sichuan Province in August 2007. However, due to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, Chengdu Railway Bureau needed to rebuild the railway networks in Sichuan Province. Also, the authority could not carry the maintenance costs of the train. It was therefore returned to Guangshen Railway Company in late December 2008. In 2012 the train was purchased by SJ and was shipped back to Sweden.

 

Nevertheless, the X2000 has proven itself a well performing and capable set of trains, working hard and bringing the Swedish Railways back from the edge. In a similar fashion to the HST of Britain, the X2000 has become the face of SJ, and one hopes that these magnificent trains can see many years of future service.

Aeroscopia est un musée aéronautique français implanté à Blagnac (Haute-Garonne), près du site AéroConstellation, et accueille notamment deux exemplaires du Concorde, dont l'ouverture a eu lieu le 14 janvier 2015

 

Le tarmac Sud du musée n'est capable d'accueillir que trois gros appareils. L'installation des appareils fut définitivement terminée après que le premier prototype de l'A400M-180 y fut arrivé le 16 juillet 2015, en dépit de la possibilité de 360 000 euros de TVA.

 

Concorde, F-BVFC, MSN209 aux couleurs d'Air France

Caravelle 12, F-BTOE, MSN280 aux couleurs d'Air Inter, dernier exemplaire construit

A400M-180, F-WWMT, MSN001 stationné depuis le 16 juillet 2015

 

La réalisation en 2019 du nouveau tarmac au Nord du musée permet l'accueil d'appareils supplémentaires issus des entreprises locales Airbus et ATR. Le transfert des avions entre le site Airbus "Lagardère" et le musée a lieu sur une semaine, à raison d'un appareil par jour :

 

ATR 72-600, F-WWEY, MSN098 aux couleurs d'ATR, transféré sur site le 26 août 2019, premier exemplaire du 72 dans sa version 600

Airbus A340-600, F-WWCA, MSN360 aux couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 27 août 2019, premier exemplaire de l'A340 dans sa version 600

Airbus A320-111, F-WWAI, MSN001 aux anciennes couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 28 août 2019, premier exemplaire de l'A320 : inauguration le 14 février 1987 en présence de Lady Diana et du Prince Charles, premier vol le 22 février 1987

Airbus A380-800, F-WXXL, MSN002 aux couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 29 août 2019, second exemplaire de l'A380. Les deux ponts de cet appareil sont visitables, ainsi que le cockpit.

ATR 42-300, F-WEGC, MSN003 aux anciennes couleurs d'ATR, transféré sur site le 30 août 2019, troisième exemplaire du 42. Cet exemplaire est décoré aux couleurs du MSN001 et porte l'immatriculation F-WEGA

 

Concorde, F-WTSB, MSN201 (ANAE), il s'agit d'un appareil de présérie qui a servi entre autres à transporter plusieurs présidents de la République française.

Airbus A300B4-203, F-WUAB, MSN238 (Airbus Heritage), décoré aux couleurs du prototype, au lieu de MSN001 démantelé. L'intérieur est visitable. Dans la première section des vitrages transparents permettent de voir la structure et les systèmes de l'avion, tandis que dans les sections suivantes sont représentés des aménagements de première classe et VIP.

Super Guppy de l'association Ailes Anciennes Toulouse, l'appareil qui servait au transport des tronçons d'Airbus est exposé porte ouverte, et une passerelle permet l'accès à la soute où un film est projeté. L'ouverture n'a pas été une mince affaire, l'appareil n'ayant pas été ouvert pendant 15 ans. L'aide des anciens mécaniciens de l'avion a été primordiale pour permettre une ouverture en toute sécurité.

 

Corvette (Airbus)

Falcon 10 no 02, prototype ayant servi aux essais du turboréacteur Larzac (Ailes Anciennes Toulouse)

Fouga Magister (AAT)

Gazelle prototype (AAT)

Mirage III C (AAT)

Nord 1100 (AAT)

Lockheed F-104G (AAT)

MiG-15 (AAT)

MS.760 Paris (AAT)

Vought F-8E(FN) Crusader et son réacteur (AAT)

Alouette II Marine (AAT)

Cessna Skymaster (AAT)

Fairchild Metro, ancien avion de Météo-France (AAT)

HM-293, de Rodolphe Grunberg

Chagnes MicroStar, avion de construction amateur, version biréacteur de Rutan VariViggen (AAT)

Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)

 

Aeroscopia is a French aeronautical museum located in Blagnac (Haute-Garonne), near the AéroConstellation site, and notably hosts two copies of the Concorde, which opened on January 14, 2015

 

The south tarmac of the museum can only accommodate three large aircraft. The installation of the devices was definitively finished after the first prototype of the A400M-180 arrived there on July 16, 2015, despite the possibility of 360,000 euros in VAT.

 

Concorde, F-BVFC, MSN209 in Air France colors

Caravelle 12, F-BTOE, MSN280 in Air Inter colors, last model built

A400M-180, F-WWMT, MSN001 parked since July 16, 2015

 

The construction in 2019 of the new tarmac north of the museum will accommodate additional aircraft from local Airbus and ATR companies. The transfer of planes between the Airbus "Lagardère" site and the museum takes place over a week, at the rate of one aircraft per day:

 

ATR 72-600, F-WWEY, MSN098 in ATR colors, transferred to site on August 26, 2019, first copy of the 72 in its 600 version

Airbus A340-600, F-WWCA, MSN360 in Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 27, 2019, first copy of the A340 in its 600 version

Airbus A320-111, F-WWAI, MSN001 in the old Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 28, 2019, first copy of the A320: inauguration on February 14, 1987 in the presence of Lady Diana and Prince Charles, first flight on February 22, 1987

Airbus A380-800, F-WXXL, MSN002 in Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 29, 2019, second copy of the A380. The two decks of this aircraft can be visited, as well as the cockpit.

ATR 42-300, F-WEGC, MSN003 in the old ATR colors, transferred to the site on August 30, 2019, third specimen of the 42. This specimen is decorated in the colors of the MSN001 and bears the registration F-WEGA

 

Concorde, F-WTSB, MSN201 (ANAE), this is a pre-production aircraft which was used, among other things, to transport several presidents of the French Republic.

Airbus A300B4-203, F-WUAB, MSN238 (Airbus Heritage), decorated in the colors of the prototype, instead of dismantled MSN001. The interior can be visited. In the first section transparent glazing allows to see the structure and systems of the aircraft, while in the following sections are shown first class and VIP fittings.

Super Guppy from the Ailes Anciennes Toulouse association, the aircraft which was used to transport the Airbus sections is on display with the door open, and a gangway allows access to the hold where a film is shown. Opening was no small feat, as the device has not been opened for 15 years. The help of the former mechanics of the aircraft was essential to allow a safe opening.

 

Corvette (Airbus)

Falcon 10 no 02, prototype used for testing the Larzac turbojet engine (Ailes Anciennes Toulouse)

Fouga Magister (AAT)

Prototype Gazelle (AAT)

Mirage III C (AAT)

North 1100 (AAT)

Lockheed F-104G (AAT)

MiG-15 (AAT)

MS.760 Paris (AAT)

Vought F-8E (FN) Crusader and its engine (AAT)

Alouette II Marine (AAT)

Cessna Skymaster (AAT)

Fairchild Metro, former Météo-France (AAT) aircraft

HM-293, by Rodolphe Grunberg

Chagnes MicroStar, amateur-built aircraft, twin-jet version of Rutan VariViggen (AAT)

Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)

+++ 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 Sondergerät SG104 "Münchhausen" was a German airborne recoillless 355.6 mm (14-inch) caliber gun, intended to engage even the roughest enemy battleships, primarily those of the Royal Navy. The design of this unusual and massive weapon began in 1939. The rationale behind it was that a battleship’s most vulnerable part was the deck – a flat surface, with relatively thin armor (as typical hits were expected on the flanks) and ideally with vital targets underneath, so that a single, good hit would cripple of even destroy a ship. The purpose of such a high angle of attack was likely to allow the projectile to penetrate the target ship's deck, where the ship's armor, if there was any, would have been much thinner than the armor on its sidesHowever, hitting the deck properly with another ship’s main gun was not easy, since it could only be affected through indirect hits and the typical angle of the attack from aballistic shot would not necessarily be ideal for deep penetration, esp. at long range.

The solution to this problem: ensure that the heavy projectile would hit its target directly from above, ideally at a very steep angle. To achieve this, the gun with battleship caliber was “relocated” from a carrier ship or a coastal battery onto an aircraft – specifically to a type that was capable of dive-bombing, a feature that almost any German bomber model of the time offered.

 

Firing such a heavy weapon caused a lot fo problems, which were severe even if the gun was mounted on a ship or on land. To compensate for such a large-caliber gun’s recoil and to make firing a 14 in shell (which alone weighed around almost 700 kg/1.550 lb, plus the charge) from a relatively light airframe feasible, the respective gun had to be as light as possible and avoid any recoil, which would easily tear an aircraft – even a bomber – apart upon firing. Therefore, the Gerät 104 was designed as a recoilless cannon. Its firing system involved venting the same amount of the weapon's propellant gas for its round to the rear of the launch tube (which was open at both ends), in the same fashion as a rocket launcher. This created a forward directed momentum which was nearly equal to the rearward momentum (recoil) imparted to the system by accelerating the projectile itself. The balance thus created did not leave much net momentum to be imparted to the weapon's mounting or the carrying airframe in the form of felt recoil. A further share of the recoil induced by the moving round itself could be compensated by a muzzle brake which re-directed a part of the firing gases backwards. Since recoil had been mostly negated, a heavy and complex recoil damping mechanism was not necessary – even though the weapon itself was huge and heavy.

 

Work on the "Münchhausen" device (a secret project handle after a fictional German nobleman created by the German writer Rudolf Erich Raspe in the late 18th century who reputedly had ridden on a cannonball between enemy frontlines), was done by Rheinmetall-Borsig and lasted until 1941. The first test of a prototype weapon was conducted on 9th of September 1940 in Unterlüss with a satisfactory result, even though the weapon was only mounted onto an open rack and not integrated into an airframe yet. At that time, potential carriers were the Ju 88, the Dornier Do 217 and the new Junkers Ju 288. Even though the system’s efficacy was doubted, the prospect of delivering a single, fatal blow to an important , armored arget superseded any doubts at the RLM, and the project was greenlit in early 1942 for the next stage: the integration of the Sondergerät 104 into an existing airframe. The Ju 88 and its successor, the Ju 188, turned out to be too light and lacked carrying capacity for the complete, loaded weapon, and the favored Ju 288 was never produced, so that only the Dornier Do 217 or the bigger He 177 remained as a suitable carriers. The Do 217 was eventually chosen because it had the biggest payload and the airframe was proven and readily available.

 

After calculations had verified that the designed 14 in rifle would have effectively no recoil, preliminary tests with dumm airframes were carried out. After ground trials with a Do 217 E day bomber to check recoil and blast effects on the airframe, the development and production of a limited Nullserie (pre-production series) of the dedicated Do 217 F variant for field tests and eventual operational use against British sea and land targets was ordered in April 1942.

 

The resulting Do 217 F-0 was based on the late “E” bomber variant and powered by a pair of BMW 801 radial engines. It was, however, heavily modified for its unique weapon and the highly specialized mission profile: upon arriving at the zone of operation at high altitude, the aircraft would initiate a dive with an angle of attack between 50° and 80° from the horizontal, firing the SG 104 at an altitude between 6,000 and 2,000 meters. The flight time of the projectile could range from 16.0 seconds for a shot from an altitude of 6,000 meters at a 50° angle to just 4.4 seconds for a shot from 2.000 meters at an almost vertical 80° angle. Muzzle velocity of the SG 104 was only 300 m/s, but, prior to impact, the effective velocity of the projectile was projected to range between 449 and 468 m/s (1,616 to 1,674 km/h). Together with the round's weight of roughly 700 kg (1.550 lb) and a hardened tip, this would still ensure a high penetration potential.

 

The operational Sondergerät 104 had an empty mass of 2.780 kg (6,123 lb) and its complete 14 inch double cartridge weighed around 1.600 kg (3,525 lb). The loaded mass of the weapon was 4,237 kg, stretching the limits of the Do 217’s load capacity to the maximum, so that some armor and less vital pieces of equipment were deleted. Crew and defensive armament were reduced to a minimum.

Even though there had been plans to integrate the wepaon into the airframe (on the Ju 288), the Gerät 104 was on the Do 217 F-0 mounted externally and occupied the whole space under the aircraft, precluding any use of the bomb bay. The latter was occupied by the Gerät 104’s complex mount, which extended to the outside under a streamlined fairing and held the weapon at a distance from the airframe. Between the mount’s struts inside of the fuselage, an additional fuel tank for balance reasons was added, too.

The gun’s center, where the heavy round was carried, was positioned under the aircraft’s center of gravity, so that the gun barrel markedly protruded from under the aircraft’s nose. To make enough space, the Do 217 Es bomb aimer’s ventral gondola and his rearward-facing defensive position under the cockpit were omitted and faired over. The nose section was also totally different: the original extensive glazing (the so-called “Kampfkopf”) was replaced by a smaller, conventional canopy, similar to the later Do 217 J and N night fighter versions, together with a solid nose - the original glass panels would have easily shattered upon firing the gun, esp. in a steep high-speed dive. A "Lotfernrohr" bomb aiming device was still installed in a streamlined and protected fairing, though, so that the navigator could guide the pilot during the approach to the target and during the attack run.

To stabilize the heavy aircraft during its attack and to time- and safely pull out of the dive, a massive mechanical dive brake was mounted at the extended tail tip, which unfolded with four "petals". A charecteristic stabilizing dorsal strake was added between the twin fins, too.

 

The ventral area behind the gun’s rear-facing muzzle received additional metal plating and blast guiding vanes, after trials in late 1940 had revealed that firing the SG 104 could easily damage the Do 217’s tail structure, esp. all of the tail surfaces’ rudders and the fins’ lower ends in particular. Due to all this extra weight, the Do 217 F-0’s defensive armament consisted only of a single 13 mm MG 131 machine gun in a manually operated dorsal position behind the cockpit cabin, which offered space for a crew of three. A fixed 15 mm MG 151 autocannon was mounted in the nose, too, a weapon with a long barrel for extended range and accuracy. It was not an offensive weapon, though, rather intended as an aiming aid for the SG 104 because it was loaded with tracer bullets: during the final phase of the attack dive, the pilot kept firing the MG 151, and the bullet trail showed if he was on target to fire the SG 104 when the right altitude/range had been reached.

 

The first Do 217 F-0 was flown and tested in late 1943, and after some detail changes the type was cleared for a limited production run of ten aircraft in January 1944. The first operational machine was delivered to a dedicated testing commando, the Erprobungskommando 104 “Münchhausen”, also known as “Sonderkommando Münchhausen” or simply “E-Staffel 104”. The unit was based at Bordeaux/Merignac and directly attached to the KG 40's as a staff flight. At that time, KG 40 operated Do 217 and He 177 bombers and frequently flew reconnaissance and anti-shipping missions over the Atlantic west of France, up to the British west and southern coast, equipped with experimental Henschel Hs 293 glide bombs.

 

Initial flights confirmed that the Do 217 airframe was burdened with the SG 104 to its limits, the already rather sluggish aircraft (the Do 217 had generally a high wing loading and was not easy to fly) lost anything that was left of what could be called agility. It needed an experienced pilot to handle it safely, esp. during start and landing. It is no wonder that two Do 217 F-0s suffered ground accidents during the first two weeks of operations, but the machines could be repaired, resume the test program and carry out attack missions.

However, during one of the first test shots with the weapon, one Do 217 F-0 lost its complete tail section though the gun blast, and the aircraft crashed into the Bay of Biscay, killing the complete crew.

 

On 4th or April 1944 the first "hot" attack against an enemy ship was executed in the Celtic Sea off of Brest, against a convoy of 20 ships homeward bound from Gibraltar. The attack was not successful, though, the shot missing its target, and the German bomber was attacked and heavily damaged by British Bristol Beaufighters that had been deployed to protect the ships. The Do 217F-0 eventually crashed and sank into the Atlantic before it could reach land again.

 

A couple of days later, on 10th of April, the first attempt to attack and destroy a land target was undertaken: two Do 217 F-0s took off to attack Bouldnor Battery, an armored British artillery position located on the Isle of Wight. One machine had to abort the attack due to oil leakages, the second Do 217 F-0 eventually reached its target and made a shallow attack run, but heavy fog obscured the location and the otherwise successful shot missed the fortification. Upon return to its home base the aircraft was intercepted by RAF fighters over the Channel and heavily damaged, even though German fighters deployed from France came to the rescue, fought the British attackers off and escorted the limping Do 217 F-0 back to its home base.

 

These events revealed that the overall SG 104 concept was generally feasible, but also showed that the Do 217 F-0 was very vulnerable without air superiority or a suitable escort, so that new tactics had to be developed. One consequence was that further Do 217 F-0 deployments were now supported by V/KG 40, the Luftwaffe's only long range maritime fighter unit. These escorts consisted of Junkers Ju 88C-6s, which were capable of keeping up with the Do 217 F-0 and fend of intercepting RAF Coastal Command’s Beaufighters and later also Mosquitos.

 

In the meantime, tests with the SG 104 progressed and several modifications were tested on different EKdo 104's Do 217 F-0s. One major upgrade was a further strengthening of the tail section, which added another 200 kg (440 lb) to the aircraft's dry weight. Furthermore, at least three aircraft were outfitted with additional dive brakes under the outer wings, so that the dive could be better controlled and intercepted. these aircraft, however, lost their plumbed underwing hardpoints, but these were only ever used for drop tanks during transfer flights - a loaded SG 104 precluded any other ordnance. On two other aircraft the SG 104 was modified to test different muzzle brakes and deflectors for the rear-facing opening, so that the gun blast was more effectively guided away from the airframe to prevent instability and structural damage. For instance, one machine was equipped with a bifurcated blast deflector that directed the rearward gasses partly sideways, away from the fuselage.

 

These tests did not last long, though. During the Allied Normandy landings in June 1944 E-Staffel 104 was hastily thrown into action and made several poorly-prepared attack runs against Allied support ships. The biggest success was a full hit and the resulting sinking of the Norwegian destroyer HNoMS Svenner (G03) by "1A+BA" at dawn on 6th of June, off Sword, one of the Allied landing zones. Other targets were engaged, too, but only with little effect. This involvement, however, led to the loss of three Do 217 F-0s within just two days and four more heavily damaged aircraft – leaving only two of EKdo 104's Do 217 F-0s operational.

 

With the Allied invasion of France and a worsening war condition, the SG 104 program was stopped in August 1944 and the idea of an airborne anti-ship gun axed in favor of more flexible guided weapons like the Hs 293 missile and the Fritz-X glide bomb. Plans for a further developed weapon with a three-round drum magazine were immediately stopped, also because there was no carrier aircraft in sight that could carry and deploy this complex 6.5 tons weapon. However, work on the SG 104 and the experience gained from EKdo 104's field tests were not in vain. The knowledge gathered from the Münchhausen program was directly used for the design of a wide range of other, smaller recoilless aircraft weapons, including the magnetically-triggered SG 113 "Förstersonde" anti-tank weapon or the lightweight SG 118 "Rohrblock" unguided air-to-air missile battery for the Heinkel He 162 "Volksjäger".

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 3 (pilot, navigator, radio operator/gunner)

Length: 20,73 m (67 ft 11 in) overall

18,93 m (62 ft 3/4 in) hull only

Wingspan: 19 m (62 ft 4 in)

Height: 4.97 m (16 ft 4 in)

Wing area: 57 m² (610 sq ft)

Empty weight: 9,065 kg (19,985 lb)

Empty equipped weight:10,950 kg (24,140 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 16,700 kg (36,817 lb)

Fuel capacity: 2,960 l (780 US gal; 650 imp gal) in fuselage tank and four wing tanks

 

Powerplant:

2× BMW 801D-2 14-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engines, delivering

1,300 kW (1,700 hp) each for take-off and 1,070 kW (1,440 hp) at 5,700 m (18,700 ft),

driving 3-bladed VDM constant-speed propellers

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 475 km/h (295 mph, 256 kn) at sea level

560 km/h (350 mph; 300 kn) at 5,700 m (18,700 ft)

Cruise speed: 400 km/h (250 mph, 220 kn) with loaded Gerät 104 at optimum altitude

Range: 2,180 km (1,350 mi, 1,180 nmi) with maximum internal fuel

Ferry range: 2,500 km (1,600 mi, 1,300 nmi); unarmed, with auxiliary fuel tanks

Service ceiling: 7,370 m (24,180 ft) with loaded Gerät 104,

9,500 m (31,200 ft) after firing

Rate of climb: 3.5 m/s (690 ft/min)

Time to altitude: 1,000 m (3,300 ft) in 4 minutes 10 seconds

2,000 m (6,600 ft) in 8 minutes 20 seconds

6,100 m (20,000 ft) in 24 minutes 40 seconds

 

Armament:

1x 355.6 mm (14-inch) Sondergerät 104 recoilless gun with a single round in ventral position

1x 15 mm (0.787 in) MG 151 machine cannon with 200 rounds, fixed in the nose

1x 13 mm (0.512 in) MG 131 machine gun with 500 rounds, movable in dorsal position

Two underwing hardpoints for a 900 l drop tank each, but only used during unarmed ferry flights

  

The kit and its assembly:

This was another submission to the "Gunships" group build at whatifmodellers.com in late 2021, and inspiration struck when I realized that I had two Italeri Do 217 in The Stash - a bomber and a night fighter - that could be combined into a suitable (fictional) carrier for a Sondergerät 104. This mighty weapon actually existed and even reached the hardware/test stage - but it was never integrated into an airframe and tested in flight. But that's what this model is supposed to depict.

 

On the Do 217, the Sg 104 would have been carried externally under the fuselage, even though there had been plans to integrate this recoilless rifle into airframes, esp. into the Ju 288. Since the latter never made it into production, the Do 217 would have been the most logical alternative, also because it had the highest payload of all German bombers during WWII and probably the only aircraft capable of carrying and deploying the Münchhausen device, as the SG 104 was also known.

 

The fictional Do 217 F-0 is a kitbashing, using a Do 217 N fuselage, combined with the wings from a Do 217 K bomber, plus some modifications. What initially sounded like a simple plan soon turned into a improvisation mess: it took some time to realize that I had already donated the Do 217 K's BMW 801 engines to another project, an upgraded He 115... I did not want to use the nightfighter's more powerful DB 603s, and I was lucky to have an Italeri Ju 188 kit at hand which comes with optional BMW 801s and Jumo 211s. Transplanting these engines onto the Do 217's wings took some tailoring of the adapter plates, but was feasible. However, the BMW 801s from the Ju 188 kit have a flaw: they lack the engine's characteristic cooling fans... Another lucky find: I found two such parts in the scrap box, even though from different kits - one left over from another Italeri Do 217 K, the other one from what I assume is/was an Italeri 1:72 Fw 190 A/F. To make matters worse, one propeller from the Ju 188 kit was missing, so that I had to find a(nother) replacement. :-/

I eventually used something that looked like an 1:72 F6F Hellcat propeller, but I an not certain about this because I have never built this model...? With some trimming on the blades' trailing edges and other mods, the donor's overall look could be adapted to the Ju 188 benchmark. Both propellers were mounted on metal axis' so that they could also carry the cooling fans. Lots of work, but the result looks quite good.

 

The Do 217 N's hull lost the lower rear gunner position and its ventral gondola, which was faired over with a piece of styrene sheet. The pilot was taken OOB, the gunner in the rear position was replaced by a more blob-like crew member from the scrap box. The plan to add a navigator in the seat to the lower right of the pilot did not work out due to space shortage, but this figure would probably have been invisble, anyway.

All gun openings in the nose were filled and PSRed away, and a fairing for a bomb aiming device and a single gun (the barrel is a hollow steel needle) were added.

 

The SG 104 was scratched. Starting point was a white metal replacement barrel for an 1:35 ISU-152 SPG with a brass muzzle brake. However, after dry-fitting the barrel under the hull the barrel turned out to be much too wide, so that only the muzzal brake survived and the rest of the weapon was created from a buddy refueling pod (from an Italeri 1:72 Luftwaffe Tornado, because of its two conical ends) and protective plastic caps from medical canulas. To attach this creation to the hull I abused a conformal belly tank from a Matchbox Gloster Meteor night fighter and tailored it into a streamlined fairing. While this quite a Frankenstein creation, the overall dimensions match the real SG 104 prototype and its look well.

 

Other cosmetic modifications include a pair of underwing dive brakes, translanted from an Italeri 1:72 Ju 88 A-4 kit, an extended (scratched) tail "stinger" which resembles the real dive brake arrangement that was installed on some Do 217 E bombers, and I added blast deflector vanes and a dorsal stabilizer fin.

In order to provide the aircraft with enough ground clearance, the tail wheel was slightly extended. Thanks to the long tail stinger, this is not blatantly obvious.

  

Painting and markings:

This was not an easy choice, but as a kind of prototype I decided that the paint scheme should be rather conservative. However, German aircraft operating over the Atlantic tended to carry rather pale schemes, so that the standard pattern of RLM 70/71/65 (Dunkelgrün, Schwarzgrün and Hellblau) with a low waterline - typical for experimental types - would hardly be appropriate.

I eventually found a compromise on a He 177 bomber (coded 6N+BN) from 1944 that was operated by KG 100: this particular aircraft had a lightened upper camouflage - still a standard splinter scheme but consisting of RLM 71 and 02 (Dunkelgrün and Grau; I used Modelmaster 2081 and Humbrol 240), a combination that had been used on German fighters during the Battle of Britain when the standard colors turned out to be too dark for operations over the Channel. The aircraft also carried standard RLM 65 (or maybe the new RLM76) underneath (Humbrol 65) and on the fin, but with a very high and slightly wavy waterline. As a rather unusual feature, no typical camouflage mottles were carried on the flanks or the fin, giving the aircraft a very bleak and simple look.

 

Despite my fears that this might look rather boring I adapted this scheme for the Do 217 F-0, and once basic painting was completed I was rather pleased by the aircraft's look! As an aircraft operated at the Western front, no additional markings like fuselage bands were carried.

To set the SG 104 apart from the airframe, I painted the weapon's visible parts in RLM 66 (Schwarzgrau, Humbrol 67), because this tone was frequently used for machinery (including the interior surfaces of aircraft towards 1945).

RLM 02 was also used for the interior surfaces and the landing gear, even though I used a slightly different, lighter shade in form of Revell 45 (Helloliv).

 

A light black ink washing was applied and post-shading to emphasize panel lines. Most markings/decals came from a Begemot 1:72 He 11 sheet, including the unusual green tactical code - it belongs to a staff unit, a suitable marking for such an experimental aircraft. The green (Humbrol 2) was carried over to the tips of the propeller spinners. The unit's code "1A" is fictional, AFAIK this combination had never been used by the Luftwaffe.

The small unit badge was alucky find: it actually depicts the fictional Baron von Münchhausen riding on a cannonball, and it comes from an Academy 1:72 Me 163 kit and its respective sheet. The mission markings underneath, depicting two anti-ship missions plus a successful sinking, came from a TL Modellbau 1:72 scale sheet with generic German WWII victory markings.

 

After some soot stains around the engine exhaust and weapon muzzles had been added with graphite, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final details like position lights and wire antennae (from heated black plastic sprue material) were added.

  

Well, what started as a combination of two kits of the same kind with a simple huge pipe underneath turned out to be more demanding than expected. The (incomplete) replacement engines were quite a challenge, and body work on the hull (tail stinger, fairing for the SG 104 as well as the weapon itself) turned out to be more complex and extensive than initially thought of. The result looks quite convincing, also supported by the rather simple paint scheme which IMHO just "looks right" and very convincing. And the whole thing is probably the most direct representation of the inspiring "Gunship" theme!

 

+6 / 3 6 5

 

We made it to the top!!! (=

 

Summit - Picacho Peak - 3,670 Feet.

 

[Chvrches - Tether (Junior Sanchez Remix)] ♪♫

 

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?

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.”

+++ 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.

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.

RM Sotheby's

Place Vauban

Parijs - Paris

Frankrijk - France

February 2019

 

Estimated : € 275.000 - 325.000

Sold for € 207.000

 

René Panhard and Émile Levassor built their first cars, a series of four identical models, in Paris during 1891. Other models followed in rapid succession, giving Panhard et Levassor the claim as first in continuous production, as opposed to Germany’s Daimler and Benz, whose early efforts came in ebbs and flows. With French colleagues and competitors Peugeot, Serpollet and De Dion, Panhard & Levassor constituted the world’s earliest automobile industry.

 

An early adherent to the front-engine, rear-drive configuration, Panhard was recognized by the application of the name Système Panhard to the layout, although another important ingredient, shaft-drive, was not universally adopted by the company until 1913. Panhard & Levassor were pioneers also with wheel steering (1896) and tubed radiators (1897). Chief engineer Arthur Krebs was also a pioneer in carburetion and electric ignition.

 

Panhard et Levassor’s annual production, which had been in single and double digits, rose above 100 in 1896, the year a four-cylinder, 2.402 cc 8 CV model was introduced. A 12 CV engine followed in 1897, and in 1899 the first 16 CV, 4.387 cc model. Eight were built through 1900, and in 1901 a new 4.072 cc 16 CV Centaure engine replaced the former Phénix powerplant. A further 153 were built through 1903.

 

This handsome rear-entrance tonneau bearing chassis no. 2565 retains its original engine, with a new body, correct-type axels and chassis, and a four-speed gearbox recently manufactured to original specifications. It is believed to have spent the majority of its life in France before being purchased by its current British owner who commenced a full restoration to its current magnificent state.

 

Fitted with an electric starter motor and a modern oil pump for enhanced reliability and drivability, it is roadworthy on today’s roads . Accompanied by a set of FIVA papers, it remains eligible for a number of motoring events. The owner reports that it drives wonderfully, is easily capable of motoring along at 60 km/h and has adequate gearing to tackle hills with ease.

 

An imposing Edwardian motor car, this Panhard et Levassor represents one of the finest vehicles of its era and is fantastic value for a powerful four-cylinder example.

The Sikorsky SH-60/MH-60 Seahawk is a twin turboshaft engine, multi-mission United States Navy helicopter based on the airframe of the United States Army UH-60 Black Hawk and a member of the Sikorsky S-70 family.

 

The U.S. Navy uses the H-60 airframe under the model designations SH-60B, SH-60F, HH-60H, MH-60R, and MH-60S. Able to deploy aboard any air-capable frigate, destroyer, cruiser, fast combat support ship, amphibious assault ship, or aircraft carrier, the Seahawk can handle antisubmarine warfare (ASW), undersea warfare (USW), anti-surface warfare (ASUW), naval special warfare (NSW) insertion, search and rescue (SAR), combat search and rescue (CSAR), vertical replenishment (VERTREP), and medical evacuation (MEDEVAC). All Navy H-60s carry either the Lucas Western or Breeze Eastern rescue hoist for SAR/CSAR missions.

 

The MH-60R is designed to replace the SH-60Bs and SH-60Fs, and be a true multi-mission helicopter. Its sensors include the ASE package, MTS-FLIR, an advanced airborne fleet data link, and a more advanced airborne active sonar. It does not carry the MAD suite. Pilot instrumentation will be based on the MH-60S’s glass cockpit, using several digital monitors instead of the complex array of dials and gauges in Bravo and Foxtrot aircraft. Offensive capabilities are improved by the addition of new Mk-54 air-launched torpedoes and Hellfire missiles. All Helicopter Anti-Submarine Light (HSL) squadrons that receive the Romeo will be redesignated Helicopter Maritime Strike (HSM).

 

The Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS), HSM-41, received the R-model aircraft in December 2005 and has begun training the first set of pilots. In 2007, the MH-60R successfully underwent final testing for incorporation into the fleet. As of August 2008, the first 11 combat-ready examples equipped HSM-71, a squadron assigned to the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74). According to Lockheed Martin, "secondary missions include search and rescue, vertical replenishment, naval surface fire support, logistics support, personnel transport, medical evacuation and communications and data relay."

 

Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 41 (HSM 41) is the Navy’s Fleet Replacement Squadron dedicated to training new MH-60R pilots and aircrew. When commissioned on January 21, 1983, as Helicopter Anti-Submarine Light 41 (HSL-41) it was the Navy’s first Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) MK III squadron and flew the Sikorsky SH-60B helicopter. HSL-41 trained pilots and aircrew for the west coast HSL squadrons in San Diego, Hawaii, and Japan.

 

The success of West Coast LAMPS detachments in the Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean, and Arabian Gulf is a tribute to the quality of initial and follow-on training that has been the hallmark of HSM 41. As a result, the squadron was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation in 1985, 1988, 1991 and 2002.

 

On December 8th, 2006, HSL-41 changed its name from Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron Light 41 to Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 41. In February 2008, HSM 41 surpassed 140,000 flight hours without a major aircraft incident and celebrated its 25th anniversary. Since 1983, HSM 41 has trained over 3000 Fleet Replacement Pilots and Aircrew for service in LAMPS MK III and MH-60R fleet squadrons.

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.

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 model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

Operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Iran's small Bell AH-1J fleet has seen a fair share of indigenous modernization in recent years. In 1971, Iran purchased 202 examples of an improved AH-1J, named "AH-1J International", from the United States. This improved Cobra featured an uprated P&WC T400-WV-402 engine and a stronger drivetrain, so that it would have a better performance under “hot & high” conditions. Recoil damping gear was fitted to the 20 mm M197 gun turret, and the gunner was given a stabilized sight and a stabilized seat, too. Of the AH-1Js delivered to the Shah's Imperial Iranian Army Aviation, 62 were TOW-capable.

Iranian AH-1Js participated in the Iran–Iraq War—which saw the most intensive use of helicopters in any conventional war. Iranian AH-1Js (particularly the TOW-capable ones) were "exceptionally effective" in anti-armor warfare, inflicting heavy losses on Iraqi armored and vehicle formations. In operations over the barren terrain in Khuzestan and later in southern Iraq, beside the standard tactics, Iranian pilots developed special, effective tactics, often in the same manner as the Soviets did with their Mi-24s. Due to the post-Revolution weapons sanctions, Iranians had to make do with what was at hand: lacking other guided ordnance they equipped the AH-1Js with AGM-65 Maverick missiles and used them with some success in several operations. About half of the AH-1Js were lost during the conflict to combat, accidents, and simple wear and tear –the rest of the fleet was kept operational and busy during the following years.

 

However, time and use took their toll on the Iranian Cobras, for which no replacement could be found. In 2001, Brigadier General Ahmad Kazemi, the then-commander in chief of the IRGC Air Force (from 2009, it became known as the IRGC Aerospace Force, or IRGCASF), requested Ali Khamenei, leader of the Islamic Republic, to permit the IRGC to procure two former army AH-1J Cobra helicopters that had been restored by the Iranian Helicopters Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC, called ‘Panha’ in Iran). They belonged to the Iranian Army Aviation Force (IRIAA, as it was then known), which lacked the funds to pay for the necessary restoration and renewal of parts and fuselage sections.

The first of these refurbished AH-1Js was a TOW Cobra capable of using the Iranian-made clone of the BGM-71A TOW anti-tank missile, the “Towfan”, while the second helicopter was a Non-TOW version capable of using only the 2¾-inch Hydra unguided rockets. They entered IRGCAF service at Fat'h helicopter base, Karaj, to the west of Tehran, in 2001. This marked the start of an ongoing but slow modernization program for the remaining Iranian Cobra fleet.

 

IHSRC also worked on the restoration of two more battle-damaged AH-1J TOW Cobras, in a project known as “Panha-2091”. The front sections of their fuselages had been destroyed by cannon rounds from Iraqi tanks during the Iran-Iraq war and the extensive restoration work required manufacture of new fuselage panels and structural parts. Panha engineers also co-operated with their colleagues from IAMI (Iranian Aircraft Manufacturing Industries, also known as HESA in Iran) and designed a new canopy for the helicopters equipped with a flat, bulletproof windshield instead of the former oval, non-bulletproof version. Under a project named HESA-2091, both helicopters were thoroughly modernized and equipped with multifunction displays and a new weapon control system with a head-up display for the pilot. Internal avionics were revamped with the addition of a GPS system in the nose, and a warning radar with four antennae providing 360 degrees coverage was integrated, too. Design and production of the new digital systems and their components was carried out by the Iranian Electronics Industries Company (IEI) with the assistance of Isfahan University of Technology and a Chinese-connected company, Safa Electronic Component Industries. Installation was performed by IAMI in Shahin-Shahr.

 

These two helicopters were ultimately named ‘Tiztak-2091’ and became prototypes for a larger modernization project for 102 remaining AH-1J Cobra attack helicopters for the Iranian Army Aviation Force. However, in total, the cost of this bold conversion projects exceeded the whole IRIAA budget for 2001, and this resulted in the cancellation of the wider modernization program just a year later. Step forward the IRGC which procured the two Tiztak-2091 prototypes alongside four more former IRIAA AH-1J Non-TOW Cobra helicopters from the Iranian Defence Ministry. These were revamped and delivered to frontline units between 2003 and 2005. However, further conversions have only be done sparingly since then, due to the lack of funds and material.

Despite these limitations, the IAAF immediately began working on upgrade projects to further increase combat capability of the small but busy fleet of Cobra helicopters. The Tiztak helicopters had been equipped with new targeting/surveillance turrets instead of their M-65 Telescopic Sight Units under a IAMI project named Towfan-2 back in 2012. The first helicopters were equipped with the Oqab EO/IR targeting turret produced by IOI (Iranian Optics Industries) in 2012, while others received an RU-290 thermal camera, a product of Rayan Roshd-Afzar.

 

After the formation of the Army Aviation Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGCAA) on February 23, 2016, the IRGCASF helicopter base at Fat’h was transferred to the IRGCGF (IRGC Ground Force), of which the IRGCAA was now a part. IRGCAA today operates more than 80 helicopters including nine Bell AH-1J International Cobras, with three examples modernized by Iranian Aircraft Manufacturing Industries (IAMI). IRGCAA had also been trying to equip its small fleet of AH-1Js with a new air-to-surface missile and an anti-tank missile, the Qaem-114 (outwardly almost identical to the American AGM-119 Hellfire), but this did not proceed beyond prototype stage.

 

Despite the active Iranian AH-1J fleet’s relatively small size after 2001, the Cobras were extremely active during counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations in the southeast and northwest of Iran. Both the IAAF and now the IRGCAA had always had two fire support teams, each formed with two to three AH-1Js in Orumiyeh and Zahedan, to be used against the PKK/PJAK and Jaish ul-Adl terrorist groups. The fire-support team at the IRGCGF Hamzeh Garrison in the northwest of Iran had two Bell 214A utility helicopters for SAR operations to accompany the Cobras while the team in Zahedan International Airport had two to three Mi-171Sh helicopters; usually, one armed with B8M1 rocket pods as a heavy fire support gunship.

The most notable use of the AH-1Js in combat by the IRGC took place in spring and summer 2008 when two AH-1Js stationed in Zahedan were extensively used in close-air-support missions during a counter-terrorism operation by IRGC Ground Forces against the Jondollah group (later to be rebranded as Jaish ul-Adl after being listed as a terrorist organization by the US State Department). After the arrest and execution of its leader, Abdolmalek Reigi by Iran, the group stopped its activities in 2009. It resumed again a few years later resulting in the launch of new anti-terror operations involving the AH-1Js in 2013, which continued periodically until 2020.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 53 ft 5 in (16.28 m) with both rotors turning

45 ft 9 in (14 m) for fuselage only

Width: 10 ft 9 in (3.28 m) for stub wings only

Height: 13 ft 5 in (4.09 m)

Main rotor diameter: 43 ft 11 in (13.39 m)

Main rotor area: 1,514.97 sq ft (140.745 m²)

Empty weight: 2,802 kg (6,177 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 4,530 kg (9,987 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× P&W Canada T400-CP-400 (PT6T-3 Twin-Pac) turboshaft engines, coupled to produce 1,530 shp

(1,140 kW; de-rated from 1,800 shp (1,342 kW) for drivetrain limitations)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 236 km/h (147 mph, 127 kn)

Range: 600 km (370 mi, 320 nmi)

Service ceiling: 10,500 ft (3,200 m)

Rate of climb: 1,090 ft/min (5.5 m/s)

 

Armament:

1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M197 3-barreled Gatling cannon in M97 chin turret with 750 rounds

4× hardpoints under the sub wings for 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 40 or Hydra 70 rockets in 7 or 19 rounds

pods; up to 16 5” (127 mm) Zuni rockets in 4-round LAU-10D/A launchers, up to eight Toophan

ATGM in a dual or quad launcher on each wing, AIM-9 Sidewinder or Misagh-2 anti-aircraft

missiles (1 mounted on each hardpoint)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is the counterpart to another modified Fujimi AH-1 model, actually a kit bashing of the AH-1S and the AH-1J model to produce something that comes close to the real IAMI HESA-2091 helicopter, an upgraded/re-built AH-1J International of the Iranian Army Air Force. The “leftover” parts were used to create an (Indonesian) AH-1G – even though the HESA-2091 was the “core project”.

 

To create this Iranian variant, the AH-1J was taken as the basis and the nose as well as the flat-window canopy from the AH-1S were transplanted. While the nose with the TOW sensor turret was just an optional part that fits naturally on the fuselage (even though not without some PSR), the clear parts was more challenging, because the flat canopy is shorter than the original. In this case I had to fill some triangular gaps between the hood and the engine section, and this was done with 1.5 mm styrene sheet wedges and some more PSR to blend the parts that were not meant to be combined into each other.

The cockpit was taken OOB, together with the pilot figures that come with the kit. I also retained the original all-metal main rotor because the Iranian Cobras AFAIK were never upgraded with composite material blades?

 

To set the HESA-2091 further apart from the original AH-1J I changed the sensor turret in the nose and scratched a ball-shaped fairing that resembles the indigenous RU-290 thermal camera – it’s actually the ball joint from a classic clear Matchbox kit display, with a base scratched from 0.5mm styrene sheet. The “ball” turned out to be a bit too large, but the overall look is O.K., since I wanted a non-TOW AH-1J. For a “different-than-a-stock-AH-1J” look A small radome for a missile guidance antenna was added to the nose above the sensor turret, too. Another personal addition are the small end plates on the stabilizers – inspired by similar installations on Bell’s early twin-engine AH-1s, even though these later disappeared and were technically replaced by a ventral fin extension and a longer fuselage; the Iranian AH-1Js retained the short, original fuselage of the single-engine Cobra variants, though. The end plates were cut from leftover rotor blades from the scrap box, IIRC they belong to a Matchbox Dauphin 2.

 

Being part of the historical Zahedan fire support team I gave the Cobra an armament consisting of a nineteen round 70mm Hydra unguided missile pods (OOB), a pair of AGM-65 Maverick missiles (an ordnance actually deployed by Iranian Cobras), together with their respective launch rails, and I added launch tubes for indigenous Misagh-2 anti-aircraft missiles (which are actually MANPADS) to the stub wings’ tips as a self-defense measure. These were scratched from 2mm styrene rods.

  

Painting and markings:

Finding a suitable paint scheme was not easy. A conservative choice would have been an early mid-stone/earth scheme or a tri-color scheme consisting of sand, earth and dark green. However, while doing WWW research I came across some more exotic and contemporary specimen, carrying a kind of leopard-esque mottle scheme or even a “high resolution” fractal/digital cammo consisting of three shades of beige/brown/grey – even though I am not certain if the latter was a “real” camouflage for operational helicopters or just a “show and shine” propaganda livery?

 

Re-creating the latter from scratch would have been prohibitively complex, because the pixelized mottles were really fine, maybe just 2” wide each in real life. But I used this scheme as an inspiration for a simplified variant, also kept in three shades of brown, even though the result was a kind of compromise due to the limited material options to create it.

The base became an overall coat with Tamiya XF-57 (Buff), plus very light grey (RAL 7035; Humbrol 196) undersides. A light black ink washing was applied, and panels were post-shaded to create a more vivid surface.

Then came the pixelized mottles in two contrast colors: first came a layer in RAL 1015 (Hellelfenbein/Light Ivory) and then a second in RAL 8011 (Nussbraun/Nut Brown) in a 1:1 ratio, slightly overlapping and letting the Buff base shine through. These mottles were not painted but rather created with square bits from generic decal stripe material in various widths from TL Modellbau. While not as sophisticated as the original camouflage, effect and look are quite similar, and add to the unique look of this HESA-2091(-ish) model. And even though I was sceptical, esp. because of the reddish Nussbraun, the blurring effect of the scheme is surprisingly good – esp. when you put the model in front of a dry mountain background! I’ll keep the concept in the back of my head for further what-if models. All those single pixels were a lot of work, but the result looks really good.

 

Another detail from many real late Iranian Cobras was taken over, too: a black tail rotor drive shaft cover that extends up onto the fin’s leading edge – probably a measure to hide exhaust soot stains on the tail boom? A black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen, too, and the rotor blades became medium grey (Humbrol 165, Medium Sea Grey) except for the main rotor blades’ undersides, which became black. The cockpit interior was uniformly painted in a very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the pilots received khaki jumpsuits and modern grey and olive drab “bone domes”.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. The Iranian roundels came from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet, registration numbers and fin flashes from an Iranian F-5. The IAAF abbreviation was created with single black 4 mm letters.

Graphite was used to weather the model, esp. the area on top of the tail boom, and the model was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish overall.

  

An exotic model – the Iranian home-brew HESA-2091 looks familiar, but it’s a unique combination of classic Cobra elements. More spectacular is the pixelated paint scheme, and the attempt to generate it with the help of square decal bits worked (and looks) better than expected! This might also work well in grey as a winter camouflage? Hmmm….

+++ 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.

Baba Yaga, over my shoulder...

 

From the Wikipedia: Andreas Johns identifies Baba Yaga as "one of the most memorable and distinctive figures in eastern European folklore", and observes that she is "enigmatic" and often exhibits "striking ambiguity".[1] Johns summarizes Baba Yaga as a "a many-faceted figure, capable of inspiring researchers to see her as a Cloud, Moon, Death, Winter, Snake, Bird, Pelican or Earth Goddess, totemic matriarchal ancestress, female initiator, phallic mother, or archetypical image".

+++ 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.

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.

+++ 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.