Chassis no. 130944

Engine no. 130944

Body no. 200355

 

115/180 hp, 5,401 cc supercharged overhead valve inline eight-cylinder engine, four-speed manual transmission, four-wheel hydraulic drum brakes, independent coil spring front and rear suspension. Wheelbase: 129.5"

 

- Offered from the Lyon Family Collection

- Single-family ownership for two decades

- The 1936 Paris Salon car

- Complete with copy of original build sheet; delivered new to Jean-Claude Solvay of Belgium

- Inspected in person by experts from Mercedes-Benz Classic Germany

- Matching-numbers

- One of a limited few 540 Ks with coupe coachwork

 

The abundant power, stiff, rugged frame and supple fully-independent suspension made Mercedes-Benz’s supercharged 540 K suitable for a vast array of coachwork. Sindelfingen was more than capable of building anything and doing so in the finest materials and to the highest standards of fit, finish, function and luxury in the world.

 

Yet despite Sindelfingen’s designers’ demonstrated ability to create exceptionally beautiful closed cars, the vast majority of Mercedes-Benz 540 Ks were fitted with open bodies in one of the several styles of Cabriolets. Most of those were four-seat Cabriolet Bs with blind rear quarters. Surprisingly, only a precious few 540 Ks – just 42 in four years’ production – received closed coachwork.

 

Only about seven of those were coupes, making them exceptionally rare examples of Sindelfingen’s creativity and style. One of the foremost examples is this 1935 Mercedes-Benz 540 K, the car Mercedes-Benz chose for its 1935 display at the important Paris Salon to show the quality and beauty of its premier product.

 

Sindelfingen

 

Daimler-Benz concentrated automobile coachwork production at Sindelfingen, a massive facility that had developed a combination of medium volume production methods for high quality coachwork and a select group of designers and craftsmen who conceived, created and built low volume, nearly custom, bodies for the finest chassis in the Mercedes-Benz line and crafted a few highly specialized bodies for the most demanding clients.

 

Sindelfingen had been constructed during the First World War to build aircraft. The Treaty of Versailles ending the war prohibited aircraft construction in Germany on the industrial scale for which Sindelfingen had been constructed and equipped, so Hanns Klemm, the factory’s manager, eventually reorganized the factory to build automobile, truck and bus bodies. Sindelfingen continued to employ classic coachwork construction techniques with wood frameworks and sheet metal panels throughout its history, but Mercedes-Benz also added high capacity steel presses of 750- and even 1,000-tons to stamp out large, complex panels, particularly fenders.

 

Sindelfingen’s aircraft-building history manifested itself in a facility-wide devotion to quality that remained central to its operation throughout the Thirties. Specialized tools, fixtures and machines were designed and built in its own shops. Processes were meticulously planned and documented. A strict quality-control system inspected every body, whether it was for a modest 170 H or an elegant “Großer Mercedes” 770 Pullman-Limousine.

 

Klemm was succeeded by Josef Bildstein, who later took over Daimler-Benz’s Mannheim factory and turned over management of Sindelfingen to Wilhelm Haspel under whose leadership the factory became a major success for Daimler-Benz. It was a complicated undertaking in which every aspect of coachbuilding was integrated, from selecting and drying the beech and ash used for framing through stamping and forming metal panels to final assembly and painting. And Sindelfingen did every kind of bodywork, from one-off and low-production bodies for the 500 K, 540 K and Großer Mercedes to volume production of Mannheim’s 170H and V, truck cabs, specialized truck bodies, buses and even contract work in volume for BMW and Wanderer. Haspel’s success at coordinating this diverse facility was evident in his later promotion to Daimler-Benz managing director in 1942.

 

In September 1932 Hermann Ahrens joined Mercedes-Benz from Horch to head the Sonderwagen (special vehicles) section, designing and building limited production coachwork for the top Mercedes-Benz models. Ahrens would design and oversee construction of all limited-production Mercedes-Benz coachwork for nearly 40 years, including the great sports roadsters and coupes on the eight-cylinder supercharged chassis. It is his artistry that created the magnificent sweeping partially-skirted fenders, integrated running boards and deftly-shaped passenger compartments and doors that so effectively complemented the imposing long hoods and exterior exhaust pipes of the supercharged 500 K and 540 K.

 

Mercedes-Benz produced almost all the coachwork for even the most expensive and luxurious of its automobiles. According to the research of Jan Melin, just 89 of the 928 380, 500 K and 540 K chassis built were supplied to outside coachbuilders. That is just 9.6%, a tiny portion of the total production and largely unprecedented among luxury automobile manufacturers in the Thirties.

 

The combination of superb engineering, high quality materials, meticulous quality control and inspired design of the supercharged eight-cylinder Mercedes-Benzes with the limited-production coachwork of Sindelfingen brought into existence some of the finest and most respected automobiles of all time.

 

Enthusiast magazines of the time were unremitting in their praise. One described the 500 K with these words: “[T]his is a master car for the very few. The sheer insolence of its great power affords an experience on its own. The design and construction throughout are typically thorough and well-executed.” Of the 540 K another said: “As a piece of engineering, it stands unsurpassed. It is amongst the most luxurious, as well as the fastest, touring cars in the world.”

 

S/n 130944

 

With so few of the 540 Ks bodied as coupes, the selection of this car to represent Mercedes-Benz at the important Paris Auto Salon in October 1936 was unusual. Yet, upon consideration, it is completely appropriate and even sensible. Indeed, according to the Mercedes-Benz archives’ delivery papers and internal documents, the car is referred to as a “Spezial Coupe.”

 

Paris was then the center of art, design, literature, style and society in Europe. The aerodynamic revolution in automobile design was then at its inception and was practiced eloquently by French coachbuilders, whose combination of Machine Design principles, Art Deco embellishment and aerodynamic refinement was the center of attention. The 1936 Paris Auto Show brought some of the most imaginative designs, like Marcel Letourneur’s Aerosport coupe on the Delage D8 120 chassis and Jean Bugatti’s Type 57 Atalante, to the public’s eye. This Mercedes-Benz 540 K Coupe was more than competitive with the French salon’s best.

 

Prior Mercedes-Benz coupes had included one for the Mercedes-Benz “Silver Arrows” team driver Rudi Caracciola, an eminently practical automobile for a driver who needed to criss-cross Europe in all weather conditions to race the W 25 model GP car. In 1934 Wilhelm Haspel had suggested the Autobahn-Kurier, a fastback five-window design with teardrop fenders of which two were built on each of the 500 K and 540 K chassis. Hermann Ahrens’ Sonderwagen facility completed the first Autobahn-Kurier in only ten weeks in order to make its auto show debut, an example of the shop’s ability to create a completely new and dramatically different design on an abbreviated schedule.

The Paris show coupe is another example of the creativity and masterful execution of which Sindelfingen was capable. Its sweeping front fenders merge into small running boards, then curve upwards into teardrop-flared rear fenders. The rear wheels are skirted, with a chrome emblem repeating the look of the front wheel’s centerlock hub. A tasteful chrome beltline molding accents the break of the hood side and extends back across the door to end near the top of the rear fender where its termination parallels the curve of the fender top. The roofline is rounded at the rear but merges nicely with the tapering rear deck, which contains a stacked pair of spare wheels and tires set nearly flush with the deck surface.

 

An attractive styling feature is the swage line which accents the sides of the fenders. It parallels the fender tops from the front valence the full length of the car, curving up and around the rear wheel skirts then down across the full width of the rear valence. The effect draws attention, visually reducing the fenders’ tall profiles.

 

Bosch headlights in chrome nacelles nestle between the fenders and the gently raked vee radiator. A single small fog light is directly in front of the radiator, and a pair of long chrome horn trumpets also sit between the fenders above a split chrome bumper which is repeated at the rear.

 

The interior is invitingly upholstered in tan leather with a plain white instrument panel in the highly finished wood dashboard. The steering wheel is leather covered. A transverse rear seat accommodates one passenger, in addition to the two in the front, or makes room for luggage.

 

After being displayed in Paris, the 540 K Coupe was first returned to Sindelfingen and then in December delivered to Jean-Claude Solvay of the Belgian chemical company dynasty in Belgium. Subsequently it became part of the collection of American Connie Bouchard in the 1960s, who undertook its restoration before selling it to John Mozart. It then was acquired by the Imperial Palace Collection from whom the Lyon family acquired it in the late 1990s. Since then, it has remained in the Lyon Collection, always treated to professional maintenance and climate-controlled storage.

 

Inspection

 

In preparation for the car’s offering in Monterey this August, this car was inspected in person by two veteran experts from Mercedes-Benz Classic Germany. Their findings were very positive. In their expert opinion, they concluded that although the car had been restored, it retained a great deal of originality in its components. The engine is matching numbers (130944) and retains its original number plate. In fact, they believe the body has never been off the car and the rear axle itself never removed – testament to the car’s originality. The transmission is original to the car, and it was determined that the steering is of the correct series. Minor modern improvements were made, including modern telescopic shocks, but the workmanship was professional and well done in their estimation. Again, the overall impression imparted on these Mercedes experts was very favorable.

 

Its deep red livery dramatically accents the sweeping lines of Hermann Ahrens’ dramatic coupe coachwork. One of only about seven coupes built on the Mercedes-Benz 540 K chassis, its effect today is, if anything, even more dramatic than it was at the Paris Salon of 1936.

 

It is the perfect complement to Ahrens’ high door, long tail Spezial Roadster, a vivid example of Mercedes-Benz’s mastery of power, speed, handling, comfort and design at the height of the golden age of classic automobiles.

 

[Text from RM Auctions]

 

www.rmauctions.com/lots/lot.cfm?lot_id=1057377

 

This Lego miniland-scale Mercedes-Benz 540K Spezial Coupe (1936 - Sindelfingen), has been created for Flickr LUGNuts' 89th Build Challenge, - "Over a Million, Under a Thousand", - a challenge to build vehicles valued over one million (US) dollars, or under one thousand (US) dollars.

 

This particular vehicle was auctioned by the RM Auction house on Saturday, August 20, 2011, where is sold for $3,080,000.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Wasp was a transonic British jet-powered fighter aircraft that was developed by Folland for the Royal Air Force (RAF) during the late 1940s and early 1950s. The Wasp’s origins could be traced back to a privately funded 1952 concept for a bigger and more capable day fighter aircraft than Folland’s very light Midget/Gnat. The Wasp’s development had been continued until the Gnat’s service introduction, and by then it had evolved under the handle “Fo-145” into a supersonic aircraft that took advantage of the new Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine, swept wings and area rule. The aircraft was built with the minimum airframe size to take the reheated Saphire and a radar system that would allow it to deploy the new de Havilland Blue Jay (later Firestreak) guided air-to-air missile. In this form the aircraft was expected to surpass the Royal Air Force’s contemporary day fighter, the only gun-armed Hawker Hunter, which had been in service since 1954, while using basically the same engine as its F.2 variant, in both performance and armament aspects. The missile-armed Wasp was also expected to replace the disappointing Supermarine Swift and the Fairey Fireflash AAMs that had been developed for it.

The Wasp strongly resembled the smaller Gnat, with a similar but much thinner shoulder mounted wing, with a sweep of 35° at quarter chord, but the new aircraft featured some innovations. Beyond the area-ruled fuselage, the aircraft had full-span leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps with roll control achieved using spoilers rather than traditional ailerons. Anticipating supersonic performance, the tailplane was all-moving. The cockpit had been raised and offered the pilot a much better all-round field of view.

 

The Wasp was armed with four 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, located under the air intakes. Each gun had a provision of 125 rounds, from form a mutual ventral ammunition bay that could be quickly replaced. Four underwing hardpoints could carry an ordnance load of up to 4.000 lb, and the Wasp’s main armament consisted of up to four IR-guided “Firestreak” AAMs. To effectively deploy them, however, a radar system was necessary. For launch, the missile seeker was slaved to the Wasp’s AI.Mk.20 X-band radar until lock was achieved and the weapon was launched, leaving the interceptor free to acquire another target. The AI.Mk.20 had been developed by EKCO since 1953 under the development label “Green Willow” for the upcoming EE Lightning interceptor, should the latter’s more complex and powerful Ferranti AIRPASS system fail. A major advantage of the AI.Mk.20 was that it had been designed as a single unit so it could be fit into the nose of smaller single-seat fighters, despite its total weight of roughly 400 lb (200 kg). For the Firestreak AAM, EKCO had developed a spiral-scan radar with a compact 18 in (460 mm) antenna that offered an effective range of about 10 miles (16 km), although only against targets very close to the centerline of the radar. The radar’s maximum detection range was 25 mi (40 km) and the system also acted as a ranging radar, providing range input to the gyro gunsight for air-to-air gunnery.

Beyond Firestreaks, the Wasp could also carry drop tanks (which were area-ruled and coulc only be carried on the inner pair of pylons), SNEB Pods with eighteen 68 mm (2.68 in) unguided rocket projectiles against air and ground targets, or iron bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber. Other equipment included a nose-mounted, and a forward-facing gun camera.

 

The Royal Air Force was sufficiently impressed to order two prototypes. Since the afterburning version of the Sapphire was not ready yet, the first prototype flew on 30 July 1954 with a non-afterburning engine, an Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6 with 8,000 lbf (35.59 kN). In spite of this lack of power the aircraft nevertheless nearly reached Mach 1 in its maiden flight. The second prototype, equipped with the intended Sapphire Sa.7 afterburning engine with 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) thrust engine, showed the aircraft’s full potential. The Wasp turned out to have very good handling, and the RAF officially ordered sixty Folland Fo-145 day-fighters under the designation “Wasp F.Mk.1”. The only changes from the prototypes were small leading-edge extensions at the wing roots, improving low speed handling, esp. during landings and at high angles of incidence in flight.

 

Most Wasps were delivered to RAF Germany frontline units, including No. 20 and 92 Squadrons based in Northern Germany. However, the Wasp’s active service did not last long, because technological advancements quickly rendered the aircraft obsolete in its original interceptor role. The Wasp’s performance had not turned out as significantly superior to the Hunter as expected. Range was rather limited, and the aircraft turned out to be underpowered, since the reheated Sapphire Sa6 did not develop as much power as expected. The AI.Mk.20 radar was rather weak and capricious, too, and the Firestreak was an operational nightmare. The missile was, due to its solid Magpie rocket motor and the ammonia coolant for the IR seeker head, highly toxic and RAF armorers had to wear some form of CRBN protection to safely mount the missile onto an aircraft. Furthermore, unlike modern missiles, Firestreak’s effectiveness was very limited since it could only be fired outside cloud - and over Europe or in winter, skies were rarely clear.

 

Plans for a second production run of the Folland Wasp with a more powerful Sapphire Sa7R engine with a raised thrust of 12,300 lbf (54.7 kN) and updated avionics were not carried out. During the 1960s, following the successful introduction of the supersonic English Electric Lightning in the interceptor role, the Wasp, as well as the older but more prosperous and versatile Hunter, transitioned to being operated as a fighter-bomber, advanced trainer and for tactical photo reconnaissance missions.

This led to a limited MLU program for the F.Mk.1s and conversions of the remaining airframes into two new variants: the new main version was the GR.Mk.2, a dedicated CAS/ground attack variant, which had its radar removed and replaced with ballast, outwardly recognizable through a solid metal nose which replaced the original fiberglass radome. Many of these machines also had two of the 30mm guns removed to save weight. Furthermore, a handful Wasps were converted into PR.Mk.3s. These had as set of five cameras in a new nose section with various windows, and all the guns and the ammunition bay were replaced with an additional fuel tank, operating as pure, unarmed reconnaissance aircraft. When Folland was integrated into the Hawker Siddeley Group in 1963 the aircraft’s official name was changed accordingly, even though the Folland name heritage persisted.

 

Most of these aircraft remained allocated to RAF Germany units and retired towards the late Sixties, but four GR.Mk.2s were operated by RAF No. 57 (Reserve) Squadron and based at No. 3 Flying Training School at Cranwell, where they were flown as adversaries in dissimilar aerial combat training. The last of the type was withdrawn from service in 1969, but one aircraft remained flying with the Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment at Boscombe Down until 24 January 1975.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 45 ft 10.5 in (13.983 m)

Wingspan: 31 ft 7.5 in (9.639 m)

Height: 13 ft 2.75 in (4.0323 m)

Wing area: 250 sq ft (23 m2)

Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6,264 kg)

Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9,541 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 23,459 lb (10,641 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6, producing 7,450 lbf (33.1 kN) thrust at 8,300 rpm,

military power dry, and 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 631 kn (726 mph, 1,169 km/h) / M1.1 at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)

654 kn (753 mph; 1,211 km/h) at sea level

Cruise speed: 501 kn (577 mph, 928 km/h)

Range: 1,110 nmi (1,280 mi, 2,060 km)

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

Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)

Wing loading: 84 lb/sq ft (410 kg/m2)

Thrust/weight: 0.5

 

Armament:

4× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, 125 rounds per gun

4× underwing hardpoints for a total external ordnance of 4.000 lb, including Firestreak AAMs,

SNEB pods, bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber or two 125 imp gal (570 l) drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly

This kit travesty is a remake of a simple but brilliant idea of fellow modeler chrisonord at whatifmodellers’com (www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=48434.msg899420#m...), who posted his own build in late 2020: a Grumman Tiger in standard contemporary RAF colors as Folland Wasp GR.Mk.2. The result looked like a highly credible “big brother” or maybe successor of Folland’s diminutive Midge/Gnat fighter, something in the Hawker Hunter’s class. I really like the idea a lot and decided that it was, one and a half years later, to build my personal interpretation of the subject – also because I had a Hasegawa F11F kit in The Stash™ without a proper plan.

 

The Tiger was built basically OOB – a simple and straightforward affair that goes together well, just the fine, raised panel lines show the mould’s age. The only changes I made: the arrester hook disappeared under PSR, small stabilizer fins (from an Italeri BAe Hawk) were added under the tail section, and I replaced the Tiger’s rugged twin wheel front landing gear with a single wheel alternative, left over from a Matchbox T-2 Buckeye. On the main landing gear, the rearward-facing stabilizing struts were deleted (for a lighter look of a land-based aircraft) and their wells filled with putty. A late modification were additional swing arms for the main landing gear, though: once the kit could sit on its own three feet, the stance was odd and low, esp. under the tail – probably due to the new front wheel. As a remedy I glued additional swing arm elements, made from 1mm steel wire, under the original struts, what moved the main wheel a little backwards and raised the main landing gear my 1mm. Does not sound like much, but it was enough to lift the tail and give the aircraft a more convincing stance and ground clearance.

 

The area-ruled drop tanks and their respective pylons were taken from the Hasegawa kit. For a special “British” touch – because the Tiger had a radome (into which no radar was ever fitted, though) – I added a pair of Firestreak AAMs on the outer underwing stations, procured from a Gomix Gloster Javelin (which comes with four of these, plus pylons).

  

Painting and markings:

Since the RAF theme was more or less settled, paintwork revolved around more or less authentical colors and markings. The Wasp received a standard RAF day fighter scheme from the late Fifties, with upper camouflage in RAF Dark Green/Dark Sea Grey and Light Aircraft Grey undersides with a low waterline. I used Humbrol 163, 106 and 166, respectively – Ocean Grey was used because I did not have the proper 164 at hand, but 106 also offered the benefit of a slightly better contrast to the murky Dark Green. A black ink washing was applied plus some panel post-shading. The silver leading edges on wings, stabilizers and fin were created with decal sheet material, avoiding the inconvenience of masking.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in a very dark grey (Revell 09, Anthracite) while the landing gear, wheels and wells received a greyish-metallic finish (Humbrol 56, Aluminum Dope). The air intakes’ interior became bright aluminum (Revell 99), the area around the jet nozzle was painted with Revell 91 (Iron metallic) and later treated with graphite for a dark metallic shine. The drop tanks were camouflaged, the Firestreaks became white so that they would stand out well and add to a certain vintage look.

 

The decals were a mix from various sources. The No. 20 Squadron badges and the Type D high-viz roundels on the wings were left over from an Airfix Hawker Hunter. The fuselage roundels came from an Italeri BAe Hawk sheet, IIRC. The bent fin flash, all the stencils as well as the serial code (which was puzzled together from two real serials and was AFAIK not allocated to any real RAF aircraft) came from an Xtradecal Supermarine Swift sheet. The individual red “B” letter came from a Matchbox A.W. Meteor night fighter.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish – I considered a glossy finish, since this was typical for RAF aircraft in the Fifties, but eventually just gave the radome a light shine.

  

Basically a simple project, and quickly done in just a couple of days. However, chrisonord’s great eye for similarities makes this “Tiger in disguise” a great fictional aircraft model with only little effort, it’s IMHO very convincing. And the RAF colors and markings suit the F11F very well.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In the late 1970ies, the Mikoyan OKB design bureau began working on a very light “strike fighter” that was intended to be a direct competitor to the F-16 Fighting Falcon. This new Mikoyan design, designated Izdeliye 33 (Izd 33) (and variously translated as “Article 33”, “Project 33”, “Product 33”, or “Project R-33”), was of conventional layout and similar in appearance to the F-16, with a fixed geometry, chin-mounted air intake and a blended wing and body layout and pronounced leading edge root extensions (LERX).

 

The aircraft was originally powered by a single Klimov RD-33 afterburning turbofan engine – the same engine used by the twin-engined MiG-29. Overall, the Izdeliye 33 was less complex and capable than the MiG-29, but also much cheaper in acquisition and operation.

 

The Izdeliye 33’s outlines resembled the MiG-29, but actually only a few components were shared, e .g. the landing gear. All aerodynamic surfaces were different, and the BWB fuselage with its single engine and air intake duct necessitated a much different internal structure.

After extensive wind-tunnel testing and evaluation of several aerodynamic details (e. g. different LERX layouts with blended edges or dogtooth tips, and different elevator layouts), the first prototype was built and successfully tested in 1984.

 

Progress was slow, since most of OKB MiG’s resources were concentrated on the MiG-29, though, but the aircraft showed good characteristics. State acceptance trials were underway when the program received a hard blow in 1986: the Soviet Air Force (VVS) dropped its support for the Izdeliye 33, due to VVS’ change of operational needs, financial constraints, a growing preference for multirole designs and the doctrine not to operate single engine combat aircraft anymore.

 

Since development of the Izdeliye 33 had already progressed to the hardware stage and the VVS was about to introduce it’s a new fighter generation (the MiG-29 as tactical fighter and the bigger Su-27 as long range inteceptor), which were not allowed for export at that time, the Izdeliye 33’s role was changed.

 

With the domestic market barred, it became a light fighter aircraft with not-so-up-tp-date avionics for foreign operators, much like the former American F-5 program. Sales potential was regarded as high, because many Soviet-friendly nations operating the ageing MiG-21 or MiG-23 export models at that time would appreciate a relatively simple and cost-efficient replacement.

 

In due course the aircraft received the official designation MiG-33SE ("S" for, "seriynyy" = serial and "E" for "eksportnyy" = export).

These production aircraft differed in several details from the Izdeliye 33, the most obvious change were enlarged elevator surfaces and bulges on the flanks which had become necessary in roder to fit bigger low pressure tires to the main landing gear for operations on rough airstrips.

 

Compared with the prototypes, the operational MiG-33 was powered by a Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power, 68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) for 3 minutes with boosted afterburner (CSR mode, altitude < 4,000 metres (13,000 ft)). The air intake received an adjustable ramp and the radome became smaller.

 

The first airframes left the Sokol production plant at Nizhny Novgorod in 1987. When the aircraft became known to the public it received the ACSS code name “Foghorn” in the West.

Instead of the MiG-29's state-of-the-art Phazotron RLPK-29 radar fire control system, a less sophisticated RLPK-29E targeting system, based on the N019EA "Rubin" radar, was fitted. As a secondary sensor, a modified S-31E optoelectronic targeting/navigation system and different IFF transponders were fitted.

 

This avionics suite still featured modes for look-down/shoot-down and close-in fighting. With this equipment, the MiG-33SE was able to carry the new and very effective R-73 (NATO: AA-11 "Archer") short-range air-to-air missile, as well as the R-27 (AA-10 "Alamo") mid-range AAM with IR and radar homing. A SPO-15L "Beryoza" ("Birch") radar warning receiver was carried, too, along with chaff/flare dispensers.

 

The new type quickly found buyers: first orders came, among others, from Algeria, Angola, Eritrea, North Korea and Vietnam, and deliveries started in early 1988. In 1989 the MiG-33SE was also offered to India for license production (replacing the country’s large MiG-21 fleet), but the country wanted a more potent aircraft and eventually became one of the first MiG-29 export customers.

 

Beyond its operational service, the MiG-33SE left other footprints in Asia, too. Following the cancellation of U.S. and European companies’ participation in the development of the Westernized Chengdu J-7 variant known as the “Super-7”, China launched a program in 1991 to develop an indigenous evolution of this MiG-21-based design, which it designated the FC-1 (“Fighter China 1”).

 

To expedite its development, officials of the Chengdu Aircraft Industries Corporation (CAC) or the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) – perhaps both – approached Mikoyan for technical support.

In 1998, CATIC purchased Izdeliye 33 design and test information from the Mikoyan design bureau, along with other research and development assistance. These designs were used for the development of JF-17 / FC-1 by Pakistan and China, which entered production in 2007.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length (incl. pitot): 16,2 m (53 ft)

Wingspan: 10.73 m (35 ft 1.5 in)

Height: 5,5 m (18 ft)

Wing area: 35,6 m² (382 ft²)

Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)

Fuel capacity: 3,500 kg. (7,716 lbs.) internally

 

Powerplant:

1× Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power,

68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) emergency power

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 (2,530+ km/h, 1,500+ mph) at high altitude; 1,110 km/h (690 mph) at low altitude

Range: 1,550 km (837 nmi, 963 mi) with drop tanks

Ferry range: 3,335 km (1,800 nmi, 2,073 mi) with auxiliary fuel

Service ceiling: 17,060 m (59,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 285 m/s (56,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 337 kg/m² (69 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.7 at loaded weight

Maximum design g-load: +9 g

 

Armament:

1x 30 mm GSh-30-1 cannon with 150 rounds in the left fuselage side

7 Hard points (6x pylons under-wing, 1x under fuselage) for up to 3,500 kg (7,720 lb)

of ordnance including six air-to-air missiles — a mix of semi-active radar homing

(SARH)/infrared homing R-60, R-27, R-73, active radar homing R-77 AAMs.

Air-to-ground weapons include RBK-500, PB-250, FAB-250, FAB 500-M62, TN-100, ECM Pods,

S-8 rockets in respective pods, S-24 unguided rockets and guided Kh-25 and Kh-29 ASMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Firts submission to 2016's first Group Build I take part in - the Cold War GB at whatifmodelers.com, and this year also starts with a "real what-if aircraft": MiG’s Izdeliye 33 was a real project, but it never got off of the drawing board or beyond wind tunnel test models. Nevertheless, it makes a great Whif topic, had it entered production and service.

 

Most interesting is the fact that the Izdeliye 33 looks a lot like the American F-16, but only superficially. Creating this aircraft as a model from scratch is rather challenging, because there are only few sources to consult, and you need a basis to start from. For the latter you have IMHO two options, beyond carving it from wood: convert an F-16 kit and change details or use a MiG-29 as basis, because it was a contemporary design and features many analogies and design details.

 

I rejected the F-16 route, because the result would certainly look like a poor Soviet fighter prop from a Hollywood B movie. The MiG-29 route would take (much) more work, but the result appear like a unique aircraft with Russian heritage, IMHO. And I think that's also the way the MiG engineers went somehow: take the two engine design, and narrow it for just a single engine.

 

Another factor for this design route was the donation kit that I had bought for this project some time ago: a Nakotne MiG-29 from Latvia, which is the worst model representation of the Fulcrum that I have seen so far. It is simple, and almost no detail is correct. Furthermore, it features crude, raised panel lines and a plastic that is rather brittle and thick, not easy to work with. I was somehow reminded of the products of VEB Plasticart from GDR times… But this wrongness was actually the kit’s selling point, as well as its low price tag.

 

The basic idea was to narrow the fuselage so that a single, wide air intake and an engine bay of bigger diameter than the original RD-33 nacelles remained – easy to do, because the whole lower fuselage half, even including the air intakes, are just a single piece! The front section was cut off, too, and a totally new cockpit tub was added - from a Revell Fiat G.91.

 

Inside, a jet engine fan, a scratched air duct with a ramp and some engine bay interior (which is visible through empty holes for the main landing gear bays…) were added.

 

Using the finished, narrowed fuselage as pattern, the upper half was cut into pieces, too: The spine and the cockpit section remained, shortened at the end and lowered in depth, as well as narrow outer BWB sections that would match the spine’s width when mounted. With lots of putty and body sculpting a new upper fuselage was created, as well as a new tail section for a bigger, single jet exhaust.

 

The nozzle is a mix from a Revell F-16 intersection (necessary in order to bridge the rather oval fuselage end with the round nozzle), a Matchbox F-14 nozzle and inside a sprocket wheel from an 1:72 Panzer IV mimicks an afterburner...

 

A new nose cone had to be used, too, and as a weird concidence a vintage Matchbox F-16 radome in the spares box (probably 30 years old!) was a perfect match to the fuselage, which had to be shortened at the front end, too, because the narrowed fuselage somewhat disturbed overall proportions.

 

The wings were taken OOB from the Nakotne kit, their (utterly wrong) square shape reminds a lot of the F-16, but they were placed about 5mm further forward. The elevators come from an Intech F-16C, with a dogtooth manually added (F-15 style, as seen on the later Izdeliye 33 model that can be found in literature). The single, tall fin is a mix of an Intech F-16 root combined with a modified Italeri F-18 Hornet fin. The stabilizer fins under the rear fuselage belong to an Italeri F-16.

 

The landing gear had to be modified, too. The OOB pieces are rather clumsy, and only the main struts survived. Their attchment points had to be moved forward, though, due to the overall change of proportions of the model. New wheels were used, too. The main wheels come from an Italeri X-32, while the front wheel comes, IIRC, from a Matchbox A-4M main landing gear.

 

Besides, the front wheel arrangement had to be re-designed, because the original position half way between the air intake trunks was not possible anymore and the new intake ramp needed space, too. Finding a plausible arrangement was not easy, since I did not want to change the OOB air intake position. So a new well was cut out under the cockpit section, the cockpit floor becoming a part of the well, and the single front wheel now retracts forward. O.K.,FOD now poses a serious issue, but I'd assume that my MiG-33 would have received louvres like the MiG-29 that prevent damage while taxiing?

 

Keen eyes might notice a front wheel change in the course of several beauty pics - the result of a kit crash from the holder which (only) smashed the front wheel strut. I replaced it with a better piece from an Italeri BAe Hawk. Took some adaptation work, but in the end it looks even better than the original attempt.

 

Around the hull several sensors, pitots and antennae were added from scratch, since the whole kit had lost a lot of its raised panel lines and other details in the construction process.

 

The underwing pylons were taken OOB, but the ordnance was totally replaced by more delicate versions of the R-27 and R-60 AAMs - these were taken from a leftover OOB set from an Italeri MiG-29.

Lots of work, but worthwhile!

  

Painting and markings:

As a non VVS-aircraft, there were many options for exotic customers, and I settled for Vietnam. Reason behind it is that I was inspired by VPAF Su-22 fighter bombers, which carry either a four-tone tactical camouflage or are painted in two shades of an intense (if not blatant) and cold baby blue!

 

These uniform upper and lower surfaces really carry bright colors, and together with the red and yellow VPAF cockades plus the typically red tactical codes these aircraft rather look like aggressors or fake museum or movie pieces! Especially when they carry drop tanks sporting the tactical scheme’s colors… Ugh!

 

The basic tone for everything is Humbrol's 44 (Pastel Blue), a co0lor I never expected to apply on a model in this amount! On the underside it was used at 100% as basic tone, while for the upper surfaces it was mixed 4:1 with Humbrol 144 (FS 35614, Intermediate Blue) and a drop of ModelMaster's Ultramarine Blue. The difference between these two tones is hard to tell, though.

 

Radomes were painted in Ocean Grey (Humbrol 106), while the cockpit was kept in typical Soviet cockpit teal. The landing gear wells were painted with a mix of Aluminum and Chromate Primer (Humbrol 56 and 81).

 

A serious issue during the painting process was the recreation of panel lines and some surface structures. Some lines in the wings and the spine were still intact, and these were in a first step made visible through grinded graphite, gently rubbed across the surfaces with a soft cloth.

 

From these, new/additional panel lines were painted on the blank surfaces with a very soft pencil - and you can hardly tell where these blur into each other. Panels themselves were emphasized through dry painting with lighter basic tones, and some more effects were added through more dull blue-grey shades. Not perfect, but for such a heavily modified kit not bad at all.

 

The decals appear minimalistic, just with roundels (from a PrintScale L-39 sheet), the tactical code (typical Chinese code digits from a Trumpeter J-8II sheet) and the eagle emblems (from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet), but there are probably more than sixty small red or black stencils all over the hull, taken from the OOB Nakotne sheet.

 

After some final weathering with graphite (esp. around the nozzle) the whole kit was sealed with acrylic matt varnish from the rattle can, and final details like position lights, pitot tips or the glossy IRST in front of the canopy were crafted.

 

The missiles received typical real world liveries, basically with white bodies and the R-27's fins in shades of grey.

  

A major conversion project, but the result looks interesting: the F-16 that was not, sort of.

It's funny to find many influences from other designs, and while one could take the Izdeliye 33 as a blunt F-16 copy I do not think that it was one, rather a retrograded MiG-29, following aerodynamic necessities that would lead to a similar overall outline.

And the bright blue color is really uniue - if this one does not stand out (at least on the ground, at altitude it appreas to be very effectice!), what else? Probably only the Red Arrows...

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Wasp was a transonic British jet-powered fighter aircraft that was developed by Folland for the Royal Air Force (RAF) during the late 1940s and early 1950s. The Wasp’s origins could be traced back to a privately funded 1952 concept for a bigger and more capable day fighter aircraft than Folland’s very light Midget/Gnat. The Wasp’s development had been continued until the Gnat’s service introduction, and by then it had evolved under the handle “Fo-145” into a supersonic aircraft that took advantage of the new Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine, swept wings and area rule. The aircraft was built with the minimum airframe size to take the reheated Saphire and a radar system that would allow it to deploy the new de Havilland Blue Jay (later Firestreak) guided air-to-air missile. In this form the aircraft was expected to surpass the Royal Air Force’s contemporary day fighter, the only gun-armed Hawker Hunter, which had been in service since 1954, while using basically the same engine as its F.2 variant, in both performance and armament aspects. The missile-armed Wasp was also expected to replace the disappointing Supermarine Swift and the Fairey Fireflash AAMs that had been developed for it.

The Wasp strongly resembled the smaller Gnat, with a similar but much thinner shoulder mounted wing, with a sweep of 35° at quarter chord, but the new aircraft featured some innovations. Beyond the area-ruled fuselage, the aircraft had full-span leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps with roll control achieved using spoilers rather than traditional ailerons. Anticipating supersonic performance, the tailplane was all-moving. The cockpit had been raised and offered the pilot a much better all-round field of view.

 

The Wasp was armed with four 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, located under the air intakes. Each gun had a provision of 125 rounds, from form a mutual ventral ammunition bay that could be quickly replaced. Four underwing hardpoints could carry an ordnance load of up to 4.000 lb, and the Wasp’s main armament consisted of up to four IR-guided “Firestreak” AAMs. To effectively deploy them, however, a radar system was necessary. For launch, the missile seeker was slaved to the Wasp’s AI.Mk.20 X-band radar until lock was achieved and the weapon was launched, leaving the interceptor free to acquire another target. The AI.Mk.20 had been developed by EKCO since 1953 under the development label “Green Willow” for the upcoming EE Lightning interceptor, should the latter’s more complex and powerful Ferranti AIRPASS system fail. A major advantage of the AI.Mk.20 was that it had been designed as a single unit so it could be fit into the nose of smaller single-seat fighters, despite its total weight of roughly 400 lb (200 kg). For the Firestreak AAM, EKCO had developed a spiral-scan radar with a compact 18 in (460 mm) antenna that offered an effective range of about 10 miles (16 km), although only against targets very close to the centerline of the radar. The radar’s maximum detection range was 25 mi (40 km) and the system also acted as a ranging radar, providing range input to the gyro gunsight for air-to-air gunnery.

Beyond Firestreaks, the Wasp could also carry drop tanks (which were area-ruled and coulc only be carried on the inner pair of pylons), SNEB Pods with eighteen 68 mm (2.68 in) unguided rocket projectiles against air and ground targets, or iron bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber. Other equipment included a nose-mounted, and a forward-facing gun camera.

 

The Royal Air Force was sufficiently impressed to order two prototypes. Since the afterburning version of the Sapphire was not ready yet, the first prototype flew on 30 July 1954 with a non-afterburning engine, an Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6 with 8,000 lbf (35.59 kN). In spite of this lack of power the aircraft nevertheless nearly reached Mach 1 in its maiden flight. The second prototype, equipped with the intended Sapphire Sa.7 afterburning engine with 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) thrust engine, showed the aircraft’s full potential. The Wasp turned out to have very good handling, and the RAF officially ordered sixty Folland Fo-145 day-fighters under the designation “Wasp F.Mk.1”. The only changes from the prototypes were small leading-edge extensions at the wing roots, improving low speed handling, esp. during landings and at high angles of incidence in flight.

 

Most Wasps were delivered to RAF Germany frontline units, including No. 20 and 92 Squadrons based in Northern Germany. However, the Wasp’s active service did not last long, because technological advancements quickly rendered the aircraft obsolete in its original interceptor role. The Wasp’s performance had not turned out as significantly superior to the Hunter as expected. Range was rather limited, and the aircraft turned out to be underpowered, since the reheated Sapphire Sa6 did not develop as much power as expected. The AI.Mk.20 radar was rather weak and capricious, too, and the Firestreak was an operational nightmare. The missile was, due to its solid Magpie rocket motor and the ammonia coolant for the IR seeker head, highly toxic and RAF armorers had to wear some form of CRBN protection to safely mount the missile onto an aircraft. Furthermore, unlike modern missiles, Firestreak’s effectiveness was very limited since it could only be fired outside cloud - and over Europe or in winter, skies were rarely clear.

 

Plans for a second production run of the Folland Wasp with a more powerful Sapphire Sa7R engine with a raised thrust of 12,300 lbf (54.7 kN) and updated avionics were not carried out. During the 1960s, following the successful introduction of the supersonic English Electric Lightning in the interceptor role, the Wasp, as well as the older but more prosperous and versatile Hunter, transitioned to being operated as a fighter-bomber, advanced trainer and for tactical photo reconnaissance missions.

This led to a limited MLU program for the F.Mk.1s and conversions of the remaining airframes into two new variants: the new main version was the GR.Mk.2, a dedicated CAS/ground attack variant, which had its radar removed and replaced with ballast, outwardly recognizable through a solid metal nose which replaced the original fiberglass radome. Many of these machines also had two of the 30mm guns removed to save weight. Furthermore, a handful Wasps were converted into PR.Mk.3s. These had as set of five cameras in a new nose section with various windows, and all the guns and the ammunition bay were replaced with an additional fuel tank, operating as pure, unarmed reconnaissance aircraft. When Folland was integrated into the Hawker Siddeley Group in 1963 the aircraft’s official name was changed accordingly, even though the Folland name heritage persisted.

 

Most of these aircraft remained allocated to RAF Germany units and retired towards the late Sixties, but four GR.Mk.2s were operated by RAF No. 57 (Reserve) Squadron and based at No. 3 Flying Training School at Cranwell, where they were flown as adversaries in dissimilar aerial combat training. The last of the type was withdrawn from service in 1969, but one aircraft remained flying with the Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment at Boscombe Down until 24 January 1975.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 45 ft 10.5 in (13.983 m)

Wingspan: 31 ft 7.5 in (9.639 m)

Height: 13 ft 2.75 in (4.0323 m)

Wing area: 250 sq ft (23 m2)

Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6,264 kg)

Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9,541 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 23,459 lb (10,641 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire Sa.6, producing 7,450 lbf (33.1 kN) thrust at 8,300 rpm,

military power dry, and 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 631 kn (726 mph, 1,169 km/h) / M1.1 at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)

654 kn (753 mph; 1,211 km/h) at sea level

Cruise speed: 501 kn (577 mph, 928 km/h)

Range: 1,110 nmi (1,280 mi, 2,060 km)

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

Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)

Wing loading: 84 lb/sq ft (410 kg/m2)

Thrust/weight: 0.5

 

Armament:

4× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon, 125 rounds per gun

4× underwing hardpoints for a total external ordnance of 4.000 lb, including Firestreak AAMs,

SNEB pods, bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber or two 125 imp gal (570 l) drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly

This kit travesty is a remake of a simple but brilliant idea of fellow modeler chrisonord at whatifmodellers’com (www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=48434.msg899420#m...), who posted his own build in late 2020: a Grumman Tiger in standard contemporary RAF colors as Folland Wasp GR.Mk.2. The result looked like a highly credible “big brother” or maybe successor of Folland’s diminutive Midge/Gnat fighter, something in the Hawker Hunter’s class. I really like the idea a lot and decided that it was, one and a half years later, to build my personal interpretation of the subject – also because I had a Hasegawa F11F kit in The Stash™ without a proper plan.

 

The Tiger was built basically OOB – a simple and straightforward affair that goes together well, just the fine, raised panel lines show the mould’s age. The only changes I made: the arrester hook disappeared under PSR, small stabilizer fins (from an Italeri BAe Hawk) were added under the tail section, and I replaced the Tiger’s rugged twin wheel front landing gear with a single wheel alternative, left over from a Matchbox T-2 Buckeye. On the main landing gear, the rearward-facing stabilizing struts were deleted (for a lighter look of a land-based aircraft) and their wells filled with putty. A late modification were additional swing arms for the main landing gear, though: once the kit could sit on its own three feet, the stance was odd and low, esp. under the tail – probably due to the new front wheel. As a remedy I glued additional swing arm elements, made from 1mm steel wire, under the original struts, what moved the main wheel a little backwards and raised the main landing gear my 1mm. Does not sound like much, but it was enough to lift the tail and give the aircraft a more convincing stance and ground clearance.

 

The area-ruled drop tanks and their respective pylons were taken from the Hasegawa kit. For a special “British” touch – because the Tiger had a radome (into which no radar was ever fitted, though) – I added a pair of Firestreak AAMs on the outer underwing stations, procured from a Gomix Gloster Javelin (which comes with four of these, plus pylons).

  

Painting and markings:

Since the RAF theme was more or less settled, paintwork revolved around more or less authentical colors and markings. The Wasp received a standard RAF day fighter scheme from the late Fifties, with upper camouflage in RAF Dark Green/Dark Sea Grey and Light Aircraft Grey undersides with a low waterline. I used Humbrol 163, 106 and 166, respectively – Ocean Grey was used because I did not have the proper 164 at hand, but 106 also offered the benefit of a slightly better contrast to the murky Dark Green. A black ink washing was applied plus some panel post-shading. The silver leading edges on wings, stabilizers and fin were created with decal sheet material, avoiding the inconvenience of masking.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in a very dark grey (Revell 09, Anthracite) while the landing gear, wheels and wells received a greyish-metallic finish (Humbrol 56, Aluminum Dope). The air intakes’ interior became bright aluminum (Revell 99), the area around the jet nozzle was painted with Revell 91 (Iron metallic) and later treated with graphite for a dark metallic shine. The drop tanks were camouflaged, the Firestreaks became white so that they would stand out well and add to a certain vintage look.

 

The decals were a mix from various sources. The No. 20 Squadron badges and the Type D high-viz roundels on the wings were left over from an Airfix Hawker Hunter. The fuselage roundels came from an Italeri BAe Hawk sheet, IIRC. The bent fin flash, all the stencils as well as the serial code (which was puzzled together from two real serials and was AFAIK not allocated to any real RAF aircraft) came from an Xtradecal Supermarine Swift sheet. The individual red “B” letter came from a Matchbox A.W. Meteor night fighter.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish – I considered a glossy finish, since this was typical for RAF aircraft in the Fifties, but eventually just gave the radome a light shine.

  

Basically a simple project, and quickly done in just a couple of days. However, chrisonord’s great eye for similarities makes this “Tiger in disguise” a great fictional aircraft model with only little effort, it’s IMHO very convincing. And the RAF colors and markings suit the F11F very well.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Grumman Mohawk began as a joint Army-Marine program through the then-Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer), for an observation/attack plane that would outperform the light and vulnerable Cessna L-19 Bird Dog. In June 1956, the Army issued Type Specification TS145, which called for the development and procurement of a two-seat, twin turboprop aircraft designed to operate from small, unimproved fields under all weather conditions. It would be faster, with greater firepower, and heavier armor than the Bird Dog, which had proved very vulnerable during the Korean War.

 

The Mohawk's mission would include observation, artillery spotting, air control, emergency resupply, naval target spotting, liaison, and radiological monitoring. The Navy specified that the aircraft had to be capable of operating from small "jeep" escort class carriers (CVEs). The DoD selected Grumman Aircraft Corporation's G-134 design as the winner of the competition in 1957. Marine requirements contributed an unusual feature to the design: since the Marines were authorized to operate fixed-wing aircraft in the close air support (CAS) role, the mockup featured underwing pylons for rockets, bombs, and other stores, and this caused a lot of discord. The Air Force did not like the armament capability of the Mohawk and tried to get it removed. On the other side, the Marines did not want the sophisticated sensors the Army wanted, so when their Navy sponsors opted to buy a fleet oil tanker, they eventually dropped from the program altogether. The Army continued with armed Mohawks (and the resulting competence controversy with the Air Force) and also developed cargo pods that could be dropped from underwing hard points to resupply troops in emergencies.

 

In mid-1961, the first Mohawks to serve with U.S. forces overseas were delivered to the 7th Army at Sandhofen Airfield near Mannheim, Germany. Before its formal acceptance, the camera-carrying AO-1AF was flown on a tour of 29 European airfields to display it to the U.S. Army field commanders and potential European customers. In addition to their Vietnam and European service, SLAR-equipped Mohawks began operational missions in 1963 patrolling the Korean Demilitarized Zone.

 

Germany and France showed early interest in the Mohawk, and two OV-1s were field-tested by both nations over the course of several months. No direct orders resulted, though, but the German Bundesheer (Army) was impressed by the type’s performance and its capability as an observation and reconnaissance platform. Grumman even signed a license production agreement with the French manufacturer Breguet Aviation in exchange for American rights to the Atlantic maritime patrol aircraft, but no production orders followed.

 

This could have been the end of the OV-1 in Europe, but in 1977 the German government, primarily the interior ministry and its intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), showed interest in a light and agile SIGINT/ELINT platform that could fly surveillance missions along the inner-German border to the GDR and also to Czechoslovakia. Beyond visual reconnaissance with cameras and IR sensors, the aircraft was to be specifically able to identify and locate secret radio stations that were frequently operated by Eastern Block agents (esp. by the GDR) all across Western Germany, but primarily close to the inner-German border due to the clandestine stations’ low power. The Bundeswehr already operated a small ELINT/ECM fleet, consisting of converted HFB 320 ‘Hansa’ business jets, but these were not suited for stealthy and inconspicuous low flight level missions that were envisioned, and they also lacked the ability to fly slowly enough to locate potential “radio nests”.

 

The pan and the objective were clear, but the ELINT project caused a long and severe political debate concerning the operator of such an aerial platform. Initially, the Bundesheer, who had already tested the OV-1, claimed responsibility, but the interior ministry in the form of the German customs department as well as the German police’s Federal Border Guard, the Bundesgrenzschutz and the Luftwaffe (the proper operator for fixed-wing aircraft within the German armed forces), wrestled for this competence. Internally, the debate and the project ran under the handle “Schimmelreiter” (literally “The Rider on the White Horse”), after a northern German legendary figure, which eventually became the ELINT system’s semi-official name after it had been revealed to the public. After much tossing, in 1979 the decision was made to procure five refurbished U.S. Army OV-1As, tailored to the German needs and – after long internal debates – operate them by the Luftwaffe.

 

The former American aircraft were hybrids: they still had the OV-1A’s original short wings, but already the OV-1D’s stronger engines and its internal pallet system for interchangeable electronics. The machines received the designation OV-1G (for Germany) and were delivered in early 1980 via ship without any sensors or cameras. These were of Western German origin, developed and fitted locally, tailored to the special border surveillance needs.

 

The installation and testing of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite lasted until 1982. It was based on a Raytheon TI Systems emitter locator system, but it was locally adapted by AEG-Telefunken to the airframe and the Bundeswehr’s special tasks and needs. The system’s hardware was stowed in the fuselage, its sensor arrays were mounted into a pair of underwing nacelles, which occupied the OV-1’s standard hardpoints, allowing a full 360° coverage. In order to cool the electronics suite and regulate the climate in the internal equipment bays, the OV-1G received a powerful heat exchanger, mounted under a wedge-shaped fairing on the spine in front of the tail – the most obvious difference of this type from its American brethren. The exact specifications of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite remained classified, but special emphasis was placed upon COMINT (Communications Intelligence), a sub-category of signals intelligence that engages in dealing with messages or voice information derived from the interception of foreign communications. Even though the “Schimmelreiter” suite was the OV-1Gs’ primary reconnaissance tool, the whole system could be quickly de-installed for other sensor packs and reconnaissance tasks (even though this never happened), or augmented by single modules, what made upgrades and mission specialization easy. Beyond the ELINT suite, the OV-1G could be outfitted with cameras and other sensors on exchangeable pallets in the fuselage, too. This typically included a panoramic camera in a wedge-shaped ventral fairing, which would visually document the emitter sensors’ recordings.

 

A special feature of the German OV-1s was the integration of a brand new, NATO-compatible “Link-16” data link system via a MIDS-LVT (Multifunctional Information Distribution System). Even though this later became a standard for military systems, the OV-1G broke the ground for this innovative technology. The MIDS was an advanced command, control, communications, computing and intelligence (C4I) system incorporating high-capacity, jam-resistant, digital communication links for exchange of near real-time tactical information, including both data and voice, among air, ground, and sea elements. Outwardly, the MIDS was only recognizable through a shallow antenna blister behind the cockpit.

 

Even though the OV-1Gs initially retained their former American uniform olive drab livery upon delivery and outfitting in German service, they soon received a new wraparound camouflage for their dedicated low-level role in green and black (Luftwaffe Norm 83 standard), which was better suited for the European theatre of operations. In Luftwaffe service, the OV-1Gs received the tactical codes 18+01-05 and the small fleet was allocated to the Aufklärungsgeschwader (AG) 51 “Immelmann”, where the machines formed, beyond two squadrons with RF-4E Phantom IIs, an independent 3rd squadron. This small unit was from the start based as a detachment at Lechfeld, located in Bavaria/Southern Germany, instead of AG 51’s home airbase Bremgarten in South-Western Germany, because Lechfeld was closer to the type’s typical theatre of operations along Western Germany’s Eastern borders. Another factor in favor of this different airbase was the fact that Lechfeld was, beyond Tornado IDS fighter bombers, also the home of the Luftwaffe’s seven HFB 320M ECM aircraft, operated by the JaBoG32’s 3rd squadron, so that the local maintenance crews were familiar with complex electronics and aircraft systems, and the base’s security level was appropriate, too.

 

With the end of the Cold War in 1990, the OV-1Gs role and field of operation gradually shifted further eastwards. With the inner-German Iron Curtain gone, the machines were now frequently operated along the Polish and Czech Republic border, as well as in international airspace over the Baltic Sea, monitoring the radar activities along the coastlines and esp. the activities of Russian Navy ships that operated from Kaliningrad and Saint Petersburg. For these missions, the machines were frequently deployed to the “new” air bases Laage and Holzdorf in Eastern Germany.

 

In American service, the OV-1s were retired from Europe in 1992 and from operational U.S. Army service in 1996. In Germany, the OV-1 was kept in service for a considerably longer time – with little problems, since the OV-1 airframes had relatively few flying hours on their clocks. The Luftwaffe’s service level for the aircraft was high and spare parts remained easy to obtain from the USA, and there were still OV-1 parts in USAF storage in Western German bases.

 

The German HFB 320M fleet was retired between 1993 and 1994 and, in part, replaced by the Tornado ECR. At the same time AG 51 was dissolved and the OV-1Gs were nominally re-allocated to JaboG 32/3. With this unit the OV-1Gs remained operational until 2010, undergoing constant updates and equipment changes. For instance, the machines received in 1995 a powerful FLIR sensor in a small turret in the aircraft’s nose, which improved the aircraft’s all-weather reconnaissance capabilities and was intended to spot hidden radio posts even under all-weather/night conditions, once their signal was recognized and located. The aircrafts’ radio emitter locator system was updated several times, too, and, as a passive defensive measure against heat-guided air-to-air missiles/MANPADS, an IR jammer was added, extending the fuselage beyond the tail. These machines received the suffix “Phase II”, even though all five aircraft were updated the same way.

Reports that the OV-1Gs were furthermore retrofitted with the avionics to mount and launch AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs under the wing tips for self-defense remained unconfirmed, even more so because no aircraft was ever seen carrying arms – neither the AIM-9 nor anything else. Plans to make the OV-1Gs capable of carrying the Luftwaffe’s AGM-65 Maverick never went beyond the drawing board, either. However, BOZ chaff/flare dispenser pods and Cerberus ECM pods were occasionally seen on the ventral pylons from 1998 onwards.

 

No OV-1G was lost during the type’s career in Luftwaffe service, and after the end of the airframes’ service life, all five German OV-1Gs were scrapped in 2011. There was, due to worsening budget restraints, no direct successor, even though the maritime surveillance duties were taken over by Dornier Do 228/NGs operated by the German Marineflieger (naval air arm).

  

General characteristics:

Crew: Two: pilot, observer/systems operator

Length: 44 ft 4 in (13.53 m) overall with FLIR sensor and IR jammer

Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.8 m)

Height: 12 ft 8 in (3.86 m)

Wing area: 330 sq. ft (30.65 m²)

Empty weight: 12,054 lb (5,467 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,544 lb (7,051 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,109 lb (8,214 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Lycoming T53-L-701 turboprops, 1,400 shp (1,044 kW) each

 

Performance:

Never exceed speed: 450 mph (390 knots, 724 km/h)

Maximum speed: 305 mph (265 knots, 491 km/h) at 10,000 ft (3,050 m)

Cruise speed: 207 mph (180 knots, 334 km/h) (econ cruise)

Stall speed: 84 mph (73 knots, 135 km/h)

Range: 944 mi (820 nmi, 1,520 km) (SLAR mission)

Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Rate of climb: 3,450 ft/min (17.5 m/s)

 

Armament:

A total of eight external hardpoints (two ventral, three under each outer wing)

for external loads; the wing hardpoints were typically occupied with ELINT sensor pods, while the

ventral hardpoints frequently carried 300 l drop tanks to extend loiter time and range;

Typically, no offensive armament was carried, even though bombs or gun/missile pods were possible.

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build became a submission to the “Reconnaissance” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com in July 2021, and it spins further real-world events. Germany actually tested two OV-1s in the Sixties (by the German Army/Bundesheer, not by the air force), but the type was not procured or operated. The test aircraft carried a glossy, olive drab livery (US standard, I think) with German national markings.

However, having a vintage Hasegawa OV-1A in the stash, I wondered what an operational German OV-1 might have looked like, especially if it had been operated into the Eighties and beyond, in the contemporary Norm 83 paint scheme? This led to this purely fictional OV-1G.

 

The kit was mostly built OOB, and the building experience was rather so-so – after all, it’s a pretty old mold/boxing (in my case the Hasegawa/Hales kit is from 1978, the mold is from 1968!). Just a few things were modified/added in order to tweak the standard, short-winged OV-1A into something more modern and sophisticated.

 

When searching for a solution to mount some ELINT sensor arrays, I did not want to copy the OV-1B’s characteristic offset, ventral SLAR fairing. I rather settled for the late RV-1D’s solution with sensor pods under the outer wings. Unfortunately, the OV-1A kit came with the type’s original short wings, so that the pods had to occupy the inner underwing pair of hardpoints. The pods were scratched from square styrene profiles and putty, so that they received a unique look. The Mohawk’s pair of ventral hardpoints were mounted, but – after considering some drop tanks or an ECM pod there - left empty, so that the field of view for the ventral panoramic camera would not be obscured.

 

Other small additions are some radar warning sensor bumps on the nose, some extra antennae, a shallow bulge for the MIDS antenna on the spine, the FLIR turret on the nose (with parts from an Italeri AH-1 and a Kangnam Yak-38!), and I added a tail stinger for a retrofitted (scratched) IR decoy device, inspired by the American AN/ALG-147. This once was a Matchbox SNEB unguided missile pod.

  

Painting and markings:

For the intended era, the German Norm 83 paint scheme, which is still in use today on several Luftwaffe types like the Transall, PAH-2 or CH-53, appeared like a natural choice. It’s a tri-color wraparound scheme, consisting of RAL 6003 (Olivgrün), FS 34097 (Forest Green) and RAL 7021 (Teerschwarz). The paints I used are Humbrol 86 (which is supposed to be a WWI version of RAL 6003, it lacks IMHO yellow but has good contrast to the other tones), Humbrol 116 and Revell 9. The pattern itself was adapted from the German Luftwaffe’s Dornier Do 28D “Skyservants” with Norm 83 camouflage, because of the type’s similar outlines.

 

A black ink washing was applied for light weathering, plus some post-shading of panels with lighter shades of the basic camouflage tones for a more plastic look. The cockpit interior was painted in light grey (Humbrol 167), while the landing gear and the interior of the air brakes became white. The scratched SLAR pods became light grey, with flat di-electric panels in medium grey (created with decal material).

The cockpit interior was painted in a rather light grey (Humbrol 167), the pilots received typical olive drab Luftwaffe overalls, one with a white “bone dome” and the other with a more modern light grey helmet.

 

The decals were improvised. National markings and tactical codes came from TL Modellbau sheets, the AG 51 emblems were taken from a Hasegawa RF-4E sheet. The black walkways were taken from the Mohak’s OOB sheet, the black de-icer leading edges on wings and tail were created with generic black decal material. Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

An interesting result, and the hybrid paint scheme with the additional desert camouflage really makes the aircraft an unusual sight, adding to its credibility.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In the late 1970ies, the Mikoyan OKB design bureau began working on a very light “strike fighter” that was intended to be a direct competitor to the F-16 Fighting Falcon. This new Mikoyan design, designated Izdeliye 33 (Izd 33) (and variously translated as “Article 33”, “Project 33”, “Product 33”, or “Project R-33”), was of conventional layout and similar in appearance to the F-16, with a fixed geometry, chin-mounted air intake and a blended wing and body layout and pronounced leading edge root extensions (LERX).

 

The aircraft was originally powered by a single Klimov RD-33 afterburning turbofan engine – the same engine used by the twin-engined MiG-29. Overall, the Izdeliye 33 was less complex and capable than the MiG-29, but also much cheaper in acquisition and operation.

 

The Izdeliye 33’s outlines resembled the MiG-29, but actually only a few components were shared, e .g. the landing gear. All aerodynamic surfaces were different, and the BWB fuselage with its single engine and air intake duct necessitated a much different internal structure.

After extensive wind-tunnel testing and evaluation of several aerodynamic details (e. g. different LERX layouts with blended edges or dogtooth tips, and different elevator layouts), the first prototype was built and successfully tested in 1984.

 

Progress was slow, since most of OKB MiG’s resources were concentrated on the MiG-29, though, but the aircraft showed good characteristics. State acceptance trials were underway when the program received a hard blow in 1986: the Soviet Air Force (VVS) dropped its support for the Izdeliye 33, due to VVS’ change of operational needs, financial constraints, a growing preference for multirole designs and the doctrine not to operate single engine combat aircraft anymore.

 

Since development of the Izdeliye 33 had already progressed to the hardware stage and the VVS was about to introduce it’s a new fighter generation (the MiG-29 as tactical fighter and the bigger Su-27 as long range inteceptor), which were not allowed for export at that time, the Izdeliye 33’s role was changed.

 

With the domestic market barred, it became a light fighter aircraft with not-so-up-tp-date avionics for foreign operators, much like the former American F-5 program. Sales potential was regarded as high, because many Soviet-friendly nations operating the ageing MiG-21 or MiG-23 export models at that time would appreciate a relatively simple and cost-efficient replacement.

 

In due course the aircraft received the official designation MiG-33SE ("S" for, "seriynyy" = serial and "E" for "eksportnyy" = export).

These production aircraft differed in several details from the Izdeliye 33, the most obvious change were enlarged elevator surfaces and bulges on the flanks which had become necessary in roder to fit bigger low pressure tires to the main landing gear for operations on rough airstrips.

 

Compared with the prototypes, the operational MiG-33 was powered by a Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power, 68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) for 3 minutes with boosted afterburner (CSR mode, altitude < 4,000 metres (13,000 ft)). The air intake received an adjustable ramp and the radome became smaller.

 

The first airframes left the Sokol production plant at Nizhny Novgorod in 1987. When the aircraft became known to the public it received the ACSS code name “Foghorn” in the West.

Instead of the MiG-29's state-of-the-art Phazotron RLPK-29 radar fire control system, a less sophisticated RLPK-29E targeting system, based on the N019EA "Rubin" radar, was fitted. As a secondary sensor, a modified S-31E optoelectronic targeting/navigation system and different IFF transponders were fitted.

 

This avionics suite still featured modes for look-down/shoot-down and close-in fighting. With this equipment, the MiG-33SE was able to carry the new and very effective R-73 (NATO: AA-11 "Archer") short-range air-to-air missile, as well as the R-27 (AA-10 "Alamo") mid-range AAM with IR and radar homing. A SPO-15L "Beryoza" ("Birch") radar warning receiver was carried, too, along with chaff/flare dispensers.

 

The new type quickly found buyers: first orders came, among others, from Algeria, Angola, Eritrea, North Korea and Vietnam, and deliveries started in early 1988. In 1989 the MiG-33SE was also offered to India for license production (replacing the country’s large MiG-21 fleet), but the country wanted a more potent aircraft and eventually became one of the first MiG-29 export customers.

 

Beyond its operational service, the MiG-33SE left other footprints in Asia, too. Following the cancellation of U.S. and European companies’ participation in the development of the Westernized Chengdu J-7 variant known as the “Super-7”, China launched a program in 1991 to develop an indigenous evolution of this MiG-21-based design, which it designated the FC-1 (“Fighter China 1”).

 

To expedite its development, officials of the Chengdu Aircraft Industries Corporation (CAC) or the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) – perhaps both – approached Mikoyan for technical support.

In 1998, CATIC purchased Izdeliye 33 design and test information from the Mikoyan design bureau, along with other research and development assistance. These designs were used for the development of JF-17 / FC-1 by Pakistan and China, which entered production in 2007.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length (incl. pitot): 16,2 m (53 ft)

Wingspan: 10.73 m (35 ft 1.5 in)

Height: 5,5 m (18 ft)

Wing area: 35,6 m² (382 ft²)

Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)

Fuel capacity: 3,500 kg. (7,716 lbs.) internally

 

Powerplant:

1× Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power,

68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) emergency power

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 (2,530+ km/h, 1,500+ mph) at high altitude; 1,110 km/h (690 mph) at low altitude

Range: 1,550 km (837 nmi, 963 mi) with drop tanks

Ferry range: 3,335 km (1,800 nmi, 2,073 mi) with auxiliary fuel

Service ceiling: 17,060 m (59,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 285 m/s (56,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 337 kg/m² (69 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.7 at loaded weight

Maximum design g-load: +9 g

 

Armament:

1x 30 mm GSh-30-1 cannon with 150 rounds in the left fuselage side

7 Hard points (6x pylons under-wing, 1x under fuselage) for up to 3,500 kg (7,720 lb)

of ordnance including six air-to-air missiles — a mix of semi-active radar homing

(SARH)/infrared homing R-60, R-27, R-73, active radar homing R-77 AAMs.

Air-to-ground weapons include RBK-500, PB-250, FAB-250, FAB 500-M62, TN-100, ECM Pods,

S-8 rockets in respective pods, S-24 unguided rockets and guided Kh-25 and Kh-29 ASMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Firts submission to 2016's first Group Build I take part in - the Cold War GB at whatifmodelers.com, and this year also starts with a "real what-if aircraft": MiG’s Izdeliye 33 was a real project, but it never got off of the drawing board or beyond wind tunnel test models. Nevertheless, it makes a great Whif topic, had it entered production and service.

 

Most interesting is the fact that the Izdeliye 33 looks a lot like the American F-16, but only superficially. Creating this aircraft as a model from scratch is rather challenging, because there are only few sources to consult, and you need a basis to start from. For the latter you have IMHO two options, beyond carving it from wood: convert an F-16 kit and change details or use a MiG-29 as basis, because it was a contemporary design and features many analogies and design details.

 

I rejected the F-16 route, because the result would certainly look like a poor Soviet fighter prop from a Hollywood B movie. The MiG-29 route would take (much) more work, but the result appear like a unique aircraft with Russian heritage, IMHO. And I think that's also the way the MiG engineers went somehow: take the two engine design, and narrow it for just a single engine.

 

Another factor for this design route was the donation kit that I had bought for this project some time ago: a Nakotne MiG-29 from Latvia, which is the worst model representation of the Fulcrum that I have seen so far. It is simple, and almost no detail is correct. Furthermore, it features crude, raised panel lines and a plastic that is rather brittle and thick, not easy to work with. I was somehow reminded of the products of VEB Plasticart from GDR times… But this wrongness was actually the kit’s selling point, as well as its low price tag.

 

The basic idea was to narrow the fuselage so that a single, wide air intake and an engine bay of bigger diameter than the original RD-33 nacelles remained – easy to do, because the whole lower fuselage half, even including the air intakes, are just a single piece! The front section was cut off, too, and a totally new cockpit tub was added - from a Revell Fiat G.91.

 

Inside, a jet engine fan, a scratched air duct with a ramp and some engine bay interior (which is visible through empty holes for the main landing gear bays…) were added.

 

Using the finished, narrowed fuselage as pattern, the upper half was cut into pieces, too: The spine and the cockpit section remained, shortened at the end and lowered in depth, as well as narrow outer BWB sections that would match the spine’s width when mounted. With lots of putty and body sculpting a new upper fuselage was created, as well as a new tail section for a bigger, single jet exhaust.

 

The nozzle is a mix from a Revell F-16 intersection (necessary in order to bridge the rather oval fuselage end with the round nozzle), a Matchbox F-14 nozzle and inside a sprocket wheel from an 1:72 Panzer IV mimicks an afterburner...

 

A new nose cone had to be used, too, and as a weird concidence a vintage Matchbox F-16 radome in the spares box (probably 30 years old!) was a perfect match to the fuselage, which had to be shortened at the front end, too, because the narrowed fuselage somewhat disturbed overall proportions.

 

The wings were taken OOB from the Nakotne kit, their (utterly wrong) square shape reminds a lot of the F-16, but they were placed about 5mm further forward. The elevators come from an Intech F-16C, with a dogtooth manually added (F-15 style, as seen on the later Izdeliye 33 model that can be found in literature). The single, tall fin is a mix of an Intech F-16 root combined with a modified Italeri F-18 Hornet fin. The stabilizer fins under the rear fuselage belong to an Italeri F-16.

 

The landing gear had to be modified, too. The OOB pieces are rather clumsy, and only the main struts survived. Their attchment points had to be moved forward, though, due to the overall change of proportions of the model. New wheels were used, too. The main wheels come from an Italeri X-32, while the front wheel comes, IIRC, from a Matchbox A-4M main landing gear.

 

Besides, the front wheel arrangement had to be re-designed, because the original position half way between the air intake trunks was not possible anymore and the new intake ramp needed space, too. Finding a plausible arrangement was not easy, since I did not want to change the OOB air intake position. So a new well was cut out under the cockpit section, the cockpit floor becoming a part of the well, and the single front wheel now retracts forward. O.K.,FOD now poses a serious issue, but I'd assume that my MiG-33 would have received louvres like the MiG-29 that prevent damage while taxiing?

 

Keen eyes might notice a front wheel change in the course of several beauty pics - the result of a kit crash from the holder which (only) smashed the front wheel strut. I replaced it with a better piece from an Italeri BAe Hawk. Took some adaptation work, but in the end it looks even better than the original attempt.

 

Around the hull several sensors, pitots and antennae were added from scratch, since the whole kit had lost a lot of its raised panel lines and other details in the construction process.

 

The underwing pylons were taken OOB, but the ordnance was totally replaced by more delicate versions of the R-27 and R-60 AAMs - these were taken from a leftover OOB set from an Italeri MiG-29.

Lots of work, but worthwhile!

  

Painting and markings:

As a non VVS-aircraft, there were many options for exotic customers, and I settled for Vietnam. Reason behind it is that I was inspired by VPAF Su-22 fighter bombers, which carry either a four-tone tactical camouflage or are painted in two shades of an intense (if not blatant) and cold baby blue!

 

These uniform upper and lower surfaces really carry bright colors, and together with the red and yellow VPAF cockades plus the typically red tactical codes these aircraft rather look like aggressors or fake museum or movie pieces! Especially when they carry drop tanks sporting the tactical scheme’s colors… Ugh!

 

The basic tone for everything is Humbrol's 44 (Pastel Blue), a co0lor I never expected to apply on a model in this amount! On the underside it was used at 100% as basic tone, while for the upper surfaces it was mixed 4:1 with Humbrol 144 (FS 35614, Intermediate Blue) and a drop of ModelMaster's Ultramarine Blue. The difference between these two tones is hard to tell, though.

 

Radomes were painted in Ocean Grey (Humbrol 106), while the cockpit was kept in typical Soviet cockpit teal. The landing gear wells were painted with a mix of Aluminum and Chromate Primer (Humbrol 56 and 81).

 

A serious issue during the painting process was the recreation of panel lines and some surface structures. Some lines in the wings and the spine were still intact, and these were in a first step made visible through grinded graphite, gently rubbed across the surfaces with a soft cloth.

 

From these, new/additional panel lines were painted on the blank surfaces with a very soft pencil - and you can hardly tell where these blur into each other. Panels themselves were emphasized through dry painting with lighter basic tones, and some more effects were added through more dull blue-grey shades. Not perfect, but for such a heavily modified kit not bad at all.

 

The decals appear minimalistic, just with roundels (from a PrintScale L-39 sheet), the tactical code (typical Chinese code digits from a Trumpeter J-8II sheet) and the eagle emblems (from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet), but there are probably more than sixty small red or black stencils all over the hull, taken from the OOB Nakotne sheet.

 

After some final weathering with graphite (esp. around the nozzle) the whole kit was sealed with acrylic matt varnish from the rattle can, and final details like position lights, pitot tips or the glossy IRST in front of the canopy were crafted.

 

The missiles received typical real world liveries, basically with white bodies and the R-27's fins in shades of grey.

  

A major conversion project, but the result looks interesting: the F-16 that was not, sort of.

It's funny to find many influences from other designs, and while one could take the Izdeliye 33 as a blunt F-16 copy I do not think that it was one, rather a retrograded MiG-29, following aerodynamic necessities that would lead to a similar overall outline.

And the bright blue color is really uniue - if this one does not stand out (at least on the ground, at altitude it appreas to be very effectice!), what else? Probably only the Red Arrows...

Front and rear views of the A2 version, capable of pulling the same payloads as the A1.

A round Chinese incense burner that burns coiled incense behind a ceramic mermaid on a Chinese base.

 

Incense is aromatic biotic material that releases fragrant smoke when burned. The term refers to the material itself, rather than to the aroma that it produces. Incense is used for aesthetic reasons, and in therapy, meditation, and ceremony. It may also be used as a simple deodorant or insectifuge.

 

Incense is composed of aromatic plant materials, often combined with essential oils. The forms taken by incense differ with the underlying culture, and have changed with advances in technology and increasing number of uses.

 

Incense can generally be separated into two main types: "indirect-burning" and "direct-burning". Indirect-burning incense (or "non-combustible incense") is not capable of burning on its own, and requires a separate heat source. Direct-burning incense (or "combustible incense") is lit directly by a flame and then fanned or blown out, leaving a glowing ember that smoulders and releases a smoky fragrance. Direct-burning incense is either a paste formed around a bamboo stick, or a paste that is extruded into a stick or cone shape.

 

HISTORY

The word incense comes from Latin incendere meaning "to burn".

 

Combustible bouquets were used by the ancient Egyptians, who employed incense in both pragmatic and mystical capacities. Incense was burnt to counteract or obscure malodorous products of human habitation, but was widely perceived to also deter malevolent demons and appease the gods with its pleasant aroma. Resin balls were found in many prehistoric Egyptian tombs in El Mahasna, giving evidence for the prominence of incense and related compounds in Egyptian antiquity. One of the oldest extant incense burners originates from the 5th dynasty. The Temple of Deir-el-Bahari in Egypt contains a series of carvings that depict an expedition for incense.

 

The Babylonians used incense while offering prayers to divining oracles. Incense spread from there to Greece and Rome.

 

Incense burners have been found in the Indus Civilization (3300–1300 BCE). Evidence suggests oils were used mainly for their aroma. India also adopted techniques from East Asia, adapting the formulation to encompass aromatic roots and other indigenous flora. This was the first usage of subterranean plant parts in incense. New herbs like Sarsaparilla seeds, frankincense, and cypress were used by Indians.

 

At around 2000 BCE, Ancient China began the use of incense in the religious sense, namely for worship. Incense was used by Chinese cultures from Neolithic times and became more widespread in the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. The earliest documented use of incense comes from the ancient Chinese, who employed incense composed of herbs and plant products (such as cassia, cinnamon, styrax, and sandalwood) as a component of numerous formalized ceremonial rites. Incense usage reached its peak during the Song dynasty with numerous buildings erected specifically for incense ceremonies.

 

Brought to Japan in the 6th century by Korean Buddhist monks, who used the mystical aromas in their purification rites, the delicate scents of Koh (high-quality Japanese incense) became a source of amusement and entertainment with nobles in the Imperial Court during the Heian Era 200 years later. During the 14th-century Ashikaga shogunate, a samurai warrior might perfume his helmet and armor with incense to achieve an aura of invincibility (as well as to make a noble gesture to whoever might take his head in battle). It wasn't until the Muromachi period during the 15th and 16th century that incense appreciation (kōdō) spread to the upper and middle classes of Japanese society.

 

COMPOSITION

A variety of materials have been used in making incense. Historically there has been a preference for using locally available ingredients. For example, sage and cedar were used by the indigenous peoples of North America. Trading in incense materials comprised a major part of commerce along the Silk Road and other trade routes, one notably called the Incense Route.

 

Local knowledge and tools were extremely influential on the style, but methods were also influenced by migrations of foreigners, such as clergy and physicians.

 

COMBUSTIBLE BASE

The combustible base of a direct burning incense mixture not only binds the fragrant material together but also allows the produced incense to burn with a self-sustained ember, which propagates slowly and evenly through an entire piece of incense with such regularity that it can be used to mark time. The base is chosen such that it does not produce a perceptible smell. Commercially, two types of incense base predominate:

 

Fuel and oxidizer mixtures: Charcoal or wood powder provides the fuel for combustion while an oxidizer such as sodium nitrate or potassium nitrate sustains the burning of the incense. Fragrant materials are added to the base prior to shaping, as in the case of powdered incense materials, or after, as in the case of essential oils. The formula for charcoal-based incense is superficially similar to black powder, though it lacks the sulfur.

Natural plant-based binders: Gums such as Gum Arabic or Gum Tragacanth are used to bind the mixture together. Mucilaginous material, which can be derived from many botanical sources, is mixed with fragrant materials and water. The mucilage from the wet binding powder holds the fragrant material together while the cellulose in the powder combusts to form a stable ember when lit. The dry binding powder usually comprises about 10% of the dry weight in the finished incense. These include:

Makko (incense powder) made from the bark of various trees in the genus Persea (such as Persea thunbergii)

Xiangnan pi (made from the bark of trees of genus Phoebe such as Phoebe nanmu or Persea zuihoensis.

Jigit: a resin based binder used in India

Laha or Dar: bark based powders used in Nepal, Tibet, and other East Asian countries.

 

Typical compositions burn at a temperature between 220 °C and 260 °C.

 

TYPES

Incense is available in various forms and degrees of processing. They can generally be separated into "direct-burning" and "indirect-burning" types. Preference for one form or another varies with culture, tradition, and personal taste. The two differ in their composition due to the former's requirement for even, stable, and sustained burning.

 

INDIRECT-BURNING

Indirect-burning incense, also called "non-combustible incense", is an aromatic material or combination of materials, such as resins, that does not contain combustible material and so requires a separate heat source. Finer forms tend to burn more rapidly, while coarsely ground or whole chunks may be consumed very gradually, having less surface area. Heat is traditionally provided by charcoal or glowing embers. In the West, the best known incense materials of this type are the resins frankincense and myrrh, likely due to their numerous mentions in the Bible. Frankincense means "pure incense", though in common usage refers specifically to the resin of the boswellia tree.

 

Whole: The incense material is burned directly in raw form on top of coal embers.

Powdered or granulated: Incense broken into smaller pieces burns quickly and provides brief but intense odor.

Paste: Powdered or granulated incense material is mixed with a sticky incombustible binder, such as dried fruit, honey, or a soft resin and then formed to balls or small pastilles. These may then be allowed to mature in a controlled environment where the fragrances can commingle and unite. Much Arabian incense, also called "Bukhoor" or "Bakhoor", is of this type, and Japan has a history of kneaded incense, called nerikō or awasekō, made using this method. Within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, raw frankincense is ground into a fine powder and then mixed with various sweet-smelling essential oils.

 

DIRECT-BURNING

Direct-burning incense, also called "combustible incense", is lit directly by a flame. The glowing ember on the incense will continue to smoulder and burn the rest of the incense without further application of external heat or flame. Direct-burning incense is either extruded, pressed into forms, or coated onto a supporting material. This class of incense is made from a moldable substrate of fragrant finely ground (or liquid) incense materials and odourless binder. The composition must be adjusted to provide fragrance in the proper concentration and to ensure even burning. The following types are commonly encountered, though direct-burning incense can take nearly any form, whether for expedience or whimsy.

 

Coil: Extruded and shaped into a coil without a core, coil incense can burn for an extended period, from hours to days, and is commonly produced and used in Chinese cultures.

 

Cone: Incense in this form burns relatively quickly. Incense cones were invented in Japan in the 1800s.

Cored stick: A supporting core of bamboo is coated with a thick layer of incense material that burns away with the core. Higher-quality variations have fragrant sandalwood cores. This type of incense is commonly produced in India and China. When used in Chinese folk religion, these are sometimes known as "joss sticks".

Dhoop or solid stick: With no bamboo core, dhoop incense is easily broken for portion control. This is the most commonly produced form of incense in Japan and Tibet.

Powder: The loose incense powder used for making indirect burning incense is sometimes burned without further processing. Powder incense is typically packed into long trails on top of wood ash using a stencil and burned in special censers or incense clocks.

Paper: Paper infused with incense, folded accordion style, is lit and blown out. Examples include Carta d'Armenia and Papier d'Arménie.

Rope: The incense powder is rolled into paper sheets, which are then rolled into ropes, twisted tightly, then doubled over and twisted again, yielding a two-strand rope. The larger end is the bight, and may be stood vertically, in a shallow dish of sand or pebbles. The smaller (pointed) end is lit. This type of incense is easily transported and stays fresh for extremely long periods. It has been used for centuries in Tibet and Nepal.

 

Moxa tablets, which are disks of powdered mugwort used in Traditional Chinese medicine for moxibustion, are not incenses; the treatment is by heat rather than fragrance.

Incense sticks may be termed joss sticks, especially in parts of East Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia. Among ethnic Chinese and Chinese-influenced communities these are traditionally burned at temples, before the threshold of a home or business, before an image of a religious divinity or local spirit, or in shrines, large and small, found at the main entrance of every village. Here the earth god is propitiated in the hope of bringing wealth and health to the village. They can also be burned in front of a door or open window as an offering to heaven, or the devas. The word "joss" is derived from the Latin deus (god) via the Portuguese deos through the Javanese dejos, through Chinese pidgin English.

 

PRODUCTION

The raw materials are powdered and then mixed together with a binder to form a paste, which, for direct burning incense, is then cut and dried into pellets. Incense of the Athonite Orthodox Christian tradition is made by powdering frankincense or fir resin, mixing it with essential oils. Floral fragrances are the most common, but citrus such as lemon is not uncommon. The incense mixture is then rolled out into a slab approximately 1 cm thick and left until the slab has firmed. It is then cut into small cubes, coated with clay powder to prevent adhesion, and allowed to fully harden and dry. In Greece this rolled incense resin is called 'Moskolibano', and generally comes in either a pink or green colour denoting the fragrance, with pink being rose and green being jasmine.

 

Certain proportions are necessary for direct-burning incense:

 

Oil content: an excess of oils may prevent incense from smoldering effectively. Resinous materials such as myrrh and frankincense are typically balanced with "dry" materials such as wood, bark and leaf powders.

Oxidizer quantity: Too little oxidizer in gum-bound incense may prevent the incense from igniting, while too much will cause the incense to burn too quickly, without producing fragrant smoke.

Binder: Water-soluble binders such as "makko" ensure that the incense mixture does not crumble when dry, dilute the mixture.

Mixture density: Incense mixtures made with natural binders must not be combined with too much water in mixing, or over-compressed while being formed, which would result in either uneven air distribution or undesirable density in the mixture, causing the incense to burn unevenly, too slowly, or too quickly.

Particulate size: The incense mixture has to be well pulverized with similarly sized particulates. Uneven and large particulates result in uneven burning and inconsistent aroma production when burned.

 

"Dipped" or "hand-dipped" direct-burning incense is created by dipping "incense blanks" made of unscented combustible dust into any suitable kind of essential or fragrance oil. These are often sold in the United States by flea-market and sidewalk vendors who have developed their own styles. This form of incense requires the least skill and equipment to manufacture, since the blanks are pre-formed in China or South East Asia.

 

Incense mixtures can be extruded or pressed into shapes. Small quantities of water are combined with the fragrance and incense base mixture and kneaded into a hard dough. The incense dough is then pressed into shaped forms to create cone and smaller coiled incense, or forced through a hydraulic press for solid stick incense. The formed incense is then trimmed and slowly dried. Incense produced in this fashion has a tendency to warp or become misshapen when improperly dried, and as such must be placed in climate-controlled rooms and rotated several times through the drying process.

 

Traditionally, the bamboo core of cored stick incense is prepared by hand from Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. pubescens since this species produces thick wood and easily burns to ashes in the incense stick. In a process known as "splitting the foot of the incense stick", the bamboo is trimmed to length, soaked, peeled, and split in halves until the thin sticks of bamboo have square cross sections of less than 3mm. This process has been largely replaced by machines in modern incense production.

 

In the case of cored incensed sticks, several methods are employed to coat the sticks cores with incense mixture:

 

Paste rolling: A wet, malleable paste of incense mixture is first rolled into a long, thin coil, using a paddle. Then, a thin stick is put next to the coil and the stick and paste are rolled together until the stick is centered in the mixture and the desired thickness is achieved. The stick is then cut to the desired length and dried.

Powder-coating: Powder-coating is used mainly to produce cored incense of either larger coil (up to 1 meter in diameter) or cored stick forms. A bundle of the supporting material (typically thin bamboo or sandalwood slivers) is soaked in water or a thin water/glue mixture for a short time. The thin sticks are evenly separated, then dipped into a tray of incense powder consisting of fragrance materials and occasionally a plant-based binder. The dry incense powder is then tossed and piled over the sticks while they are spread apart. The sticks are then gently rolled and packed to maintain roundness while more incense powder is repeatedly tossed onto the sticks. Three to four layers of powder are coated onto the sticks, forming a 2 mm thick layer of incense material on the stick. The coated incense is then allowed to dry in open air. Additional coatings of incense mixture can be applied after each period of successive drying. Incense sticks produced in this fashion and burned in temples of Chinese folk religion can have a thickness between 2 and 4 millimeters.

Compression: A damp powder is mechanically formed around a cored stick by compression, similar to the way uncored sticks are formed. This form is becoming more common due to the higher labor cost of producing powder-coated or paste-rolled sticks.

 

BURNING INCENSE

Indirect-burning incense burned directly on top of a heat source or on a hot metal plate in a censer or thurible.

 

In Japan a similar censer called a egōro (柄香炉) is used by several Buddhist sects. The egōro is usually made of brass, with a long handle and no chain. Instead of charcoal, makkō powder is poured into a depression made in a bed of ash. The makkō is lit and the incense mixture is burned on top. This method is known as sonae-kō (religious burning).

 

For direct-burning incense, the tip or end of the incense is ignited with a flame or other heat source until the incense begins to turn into ash at the burning end. The flame is then fanned or blown out, leaving the incense to smolder.

 

CULTURAL VARIATIONS

ARABIAN

In most Arab countries, incense is burned in the form of scented chips or blocks called bakhoor (Arabic: بخور‎ [bɑˈxuːɾ, bʊ-]. Incense is used on special occasions like weddings or on Fridays or generally to perfume the house. The bakhoor is usually burned in a mabkhara, a traditional incense burner (censer) similar to the Somali Dabqaad. It is customary in many Arab countries to pass bakhoor among the guests in the majlis ('congregation'). This is done as a gesture of hospitality.

 

CHINESE

For over two thousand years, the Chinese have used incense in religious ceremonies, ancestor veneration, Traditional Chinese medicine, and daily life. Agarwood (chénxiāng) and sandalwood (tánxiāng) are the two most important ingredients in Chinese incense.

 

Along with the introduction of Buddhism in China came calibrated incense sticks and incense clocks. The first known record is by poet Yu Jianwu (487-551): "By burning incense we know the o'clock of the night, With graduated candles we confirm the tally of the watches." The use of these incense timekeeping devices spread from Buddhist monasteries into Chinese secular society.

Incense-stick burning is an everyday practice in traditional Chinese religion. There are many different types of stick used for different purposes or on different festive days. Many of them are long and thin. Sticks are mostly coloured yellow, red, or more rarely, black. Thick sticks are used for special ceremonies, such as funerals. Spiral incense, with exceedingly long burn times, is often hung from temple ceilings. In some states, such as Taiwan,

 

Singapore, or Malaysia, where they celebrate the Ghost Festival, large, pillar-like dragon incense sticks are sometimes used. These generate so much smoke and heat that they are only burned outside.

 

Chinese incense sticks for use in popular religion are generally odorless or only use the slightest trace of jasmine or rose, since it is the smoke, not the scent, which is important in conveying the prayers of the faithful to heaven. They are composed of the dried powdered bark of a non-scented species of cinnamon native to Cambodia, Cinnamomum cambodianum. Inexpensive packs of 300 are often found for sale in Chinese supermarkets. Though they contain no sandalwood, they often include the Chinese character for sandalwood on the label, as a generic term for incense.

 

Highly scented Chinese incense sticks are used by some Buddhists. These are often quite expensive due to the use of large amounts of sandalwood, agarwood, or floral scents used. The sandalwood used in Chinese incenses does not come from India, its native home, but rather from groves planted within Chinese territory. Sites belonging to Tzu Chi, Chung Tai Shan, Dharma Drum Mountain, Xingtian Temple, or City of Ten Thousand Buddhas do not use incense.

 

INDIAN

Incense sticks, also known as agarbathi (or agarbatti) and joss sticks, in which an incense paste is rolled or moulded around a bamboo stick, are the main forms of incense in India. The bamboo method originated in India, and is distinct from the Nepali/Tibetan and Japanese methods of stick making without bamboo cores. Though the method is also used in the west, it is strongly associated with India.

 

The basic ingredients are the bamboo stick, the paste (generally made of charcoal dust and joss/jiggit/gum/tabu powder – an adhesive made from the bark of litsea glutinosa and other trees), and the perfume ingredients - which would be a masala (spice mix) powder of ground ingredients into which the stick would be rolled, or a perfume liquid sometimes consisting of synthetic ingredients into which the stick would be dipped. Perfume is sometimes sprayed on the coated sticks. Stick machines are sometimes used, which coat the stick with paste and perfume, though the bulk of production is done by hand rolling at home. There are about 5,000 incense companies in India that take raw unperfumed sticks hand-rolled by approximately 200,000 women working part-time at home, and then apply their own brand of perfume, and package the sticks for sale. An experienced home-worker can produce 4,000 raw sticks a day. There are about 50 large companies that together account for up to 30% of the market, and around 500 of the companies, including a significant number of the main ones, including Moksh Agarbatti and Cycle Pure, are based in Mysore.

 

JEWISH TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM

KETORET

Ketoret was the incense offered in the Temple in Jerusalem and is stated in the Book of Exodus to be a mixture of stacte, onycha, galbanum and frankincense.

 

TIBETAN

Tibetan incense refers to a common style of incense found in Tibet, Nepal, and Bhutan. These incenses have a characteristic "earthy" scent to them. Ingredients vary from cinnamon, clove, and juniper, to kusum flower, ashvagandha, and sahi jeera.

 

Many Tibetan incenses are thought to have medicinal properties. Their recipes come from ancient Vedic texts that are based on even older Ayurvedic medical texts. The recipes have remained unchanged for centuries.

 

JAPANESE

In Japan incense appreciation folklore includes art, culture, history, and ceremony. It can be compared to and has some of the same qualities as music, art, or literature. Incense burning may occasionally take place within the tea ceremony, just like calligraphy, ikebana, and scroll arrangement. The art of incense appreciation, or koh-do, is generally practiced as a separate art form from the tea ceremony, and usually within a tea room of traditional Zen design.

 

Agarwood (沈香 Jinkō) and sandalwood (白檀 byakudan) are the two most important ingredients in Japanese incense. Agarwood is known as "jinkō" in Japan, which translates as "incense that sinks in water", due to the weight of the resin in the wood. Sandalwood is one of the most calming incense ingredients and lends itself well to meditation. It is also used in the Japanese tea ceremony. The most valued Sandalwood comes from Mysore in the state of Karnataka in India.

 

Another important ingredient in Japanese incense is kyara (伽羅). Kyara is one kind of agarwood (Japanese incense companies divide agarwood into 6 categories depending on the region obtained and properties of the agarwood). Kyara is currently worth more than its weight in gold.

 

Some terms used in Japanese incense culture include:

 

Incense arts: [香道, kodo]

Agarwood: [ 沈香 ] – from heartwood from Aquilaria trees, unique, the incense wood most used in incense ceremony, other names are: lignum aloes or aloeswood, gaharu, jinko, or oud.

Censer/Incense burner: [香爐] – usually small and used for heating incense not burning, or larger and used for burning

Charcoal: [木炭] – only the odorless kind is used.

Incense woods: [ 香木 ] – a naturally fragrant resinous wood.

 

USAGE

PRACTICAL

Incense fragrances can be of such great strength that they obscure other less desirable odours. This utility led to the use of incense in funerary ceremonies because the incense could smother the scent of decay. An example, as well as of religious use, is the giant Botafumeiro thurible that swings from the ceiling of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. It is used in part to mask the scent of the many tired, unwashed pilgrims huddled together in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.

 

A similar utilitarian use of incense can be found in the post-Reformation Church of England. Although the ceremonial use of incense was abandoned until the Oxford Movement, it was common to have incense (typically frankincense) burned before grand occasions, when the church would be crowded. The frankincense was carried about by a member of the vestry before the service in a vessel called a 'perfuming pan'. In iconography of the day, this vessel is shown to be elongated and flat, with a single long handle on one side. The perfuming pan was used instead of the thurible, as the latter would have likely offended the Protestant sensibilities of the 17th and 18th centuries.

 

The regular burning of direct-burning incense has been used for chronological measurement in incense clocks. These devices can range from a simple trail of incense material calibrated to burn in a specific time period, to elaborate and ornate instruments with bells or gongs, designed to involve multiple senses.

 

Incense made from materials such as citronella can repel mosquitoes and other irritating, distracting, or pestilential insects. This use has been deployed in concert with religious uses by Zen Buddhists who claim that the incense that is part of their meditative practice is designed to keep bothersome insects from distracting the practitioner. Currently, more effective pyrethroid-based mosquito repellent incense is widely available in Asia.

 

Papier d'Arménie was originally sold as a disinfectant as well as for the fragrance.

 

Incense is also used often by people who smoke indoors and do not want the smell to linger.

 

AESTHETIC

Many people burn incense to appreciate its smell, without assigning any other specific significance to it, in the same way that the foregoing items can be produced or consumed solely for the contemplation or enjoyment of the aroma. An example is the kōdō (香道), where (frequently costly) raw incense materials such as agarwood are appreciated in a formal setting.

 

RELIGIOUS

Religious use of incense is prevalent in many cultures and may have roots in the practical and aesthetic uses, considering that many of these religions have little else in common. One common motif is incense as a form of sacrificial offering to a deity. Such use was common in Judaic worship and remains in use for example in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican churches, Taoist and Buddhist Chinese jingxiang (敬香 "offer incense), etc.

 

Aphrodisiac Incense has been used as an aphrodisiac in some cultures. Both ancient Greek and ancient Egyptian mythology suggest the usage of incense by goddesses and nymphs. Incense is thought to heighten sexual desires and sexual attraction.

 

Time-keeper Incense clocks are used to time social, medical and religious practices in parts of eastern Asia. They are primarily used in Buddhism as a timer of mediation and prayer. Different types of incense burn at different rates; therefore, different incense are used for different practices. The duration of burning ranges from minutes to months.

 

Healing stone cleanser Incense is claimed to cleanse and restore energy in healing stones. The technique used is called “smudging” and is done by holding a healing stone over the smoke of burning incense for 20 to 30 seconds. Some people believe that this process not only restores energy but eliminates negative energy.

 

HEALTH RISK FROM INCENSE SMOKE

Incense smoke contains various contaminants including gaseous pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and adsorbed toxic pollutants (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxic metals). The solid particles range between ~10 and 500 nm. In a comparison, Indian sandalwood was found to have the highest emission rate, followed by Japanese aloeswood, then Taiwanese aloeswood, while Chinese smokeless sandalwood had the least.

 

Research carried out in Taiwan in 2001 linked the burning of incense sticks to the slow accumulation of potential carcinogens in a poorly ventilated environment by measuring the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (including benzopyrene) within Buddhist temples. The study found gaseous aliphatic aldehydes, which are carcinogenic and mutagenic, in incense smoke.

 

A survey of risk factors for lung cancer, also conducted in Taiwan, noted an inverse association between incense burning and adenocarcinoma of the lung, though the finding was not deemed significant.

 

In contrast, epidemiologists at the Hong Kong Anti-Cancer Society, Aichi Cancer Center in Nagoya, and several other centers found: "No association was found between exposure to incense burning and respiratory symptoms like chronic cough, chronic sputum, chronic bronchitis, runny nose, wheezing, asthma, allergic rhinitis, or pneumonia among the three populations studied: i.e. primary school children, their non-smoking mothers, or a group of older non-smoking female controls. Incense burning did not affect lung cancer risk among non-smokers, but it significantly reduced risk among smokers, even after adjusting for lifetime smoking amount." However, the researchers qualified their findings by noting that incense burning in the studied population was associated with certain low-cancer-risk dietary habits, and concluded that "diet can be a significant confounder of epidemiological studies on air pollution and respiratory health."

 

Although several studies have not shown a link between incense and lung cancer, many other types of cancer have been directly linked to burning incense. A study published in 2008 in the medical journal Cancer found that incense use is associated with a statistically significant higher risk of cancers of the upper respiratory tract, with the exception of nasopharyngeal cancer. Those who used incense heavily also were 80% more likely to develop squamous-cell carcinomas. The link between incense use and increased cancer risk held when the researchers weighed other factors, including cigarette smoking, diet and drinking habits. The research team noted that "This association is consistent with a large number of studies identifying carcinogens in incense smoke, and given the widespread and sometimes involuntary exposure to smoke from burning incense, these findings carry significant public health implications."

 

In 2015, the South China University of Technology found toxicity of incense to Chinese hamsters' ovarian cells to be even higher than cigarettes.

 

Incensole acetate, a component of Frankincense, has been shown to have anxiolytic-like and antidepressive-like effects in mice, mediated by activation of poorly-understood TRPV3 ion channels in the brain.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armoured divisions, had become increasingly urgent for the German Armed Forces, as from 1943 on the German Air Force was less and less able to protect itself against enemy fighter bombers.

Therefore, a multitude of improvised and specially designed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns were built, many based on the Panzer IV chassis. This development started with the Flakpanzer IV “Möbelwagen”, which was only a Kampfpanzer IV with the turret removed and a 20mm Flakvierling installed instead, together with foldable side walls that offered only poor protection for the gun crew. The lineage then progressed through the Wirbelwind and Ostwind models, which had their weapons and the crew protected in fully rotating turrets, but these were still open at the top. This flaw was to be eliminated in the Kugelblitz, the final development of the Flakpanzer IV.

 

The Kugelblitz used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement. The MK 103 was a powerful aircraft weapon that had formerly been fitted in single mounts to such planes as the Henschel Hs 129 or Bf 1110 in a ventral gun pod against tanks, and it was also fitted to the twin-engine Dornier Do 335 heavy fighter and other interceptors against Allied bombers. When used by the army, it received the designation “3 cm Flak 38”. It had a weight of only 141 kg (311 lb) and a length of 235 cm (93 in) with muzzle brake. Barrel length was 134 cm (53 in), resulting in caliber L/44.7 (44.7 caliber). The weapon’s muzzle velocity was around 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s), allowing an armour penetration for APCR 42–52 mm (1.7–2.0 in)/60°/300 m (980 ft) or 75–95 mm (3.0–3.7 in)/ 90°/ 300 m (980 ft), with an effective maximum firing range of around 5.700 m (18.670 ft). The MK 103 was gas-operated, fully automatic and belt-fed, an innovative feature at that time for AA guns.

In the fully enclosed Kugelblitz turret the weapons could be fired singly or simultaneously, and their theoretical rate of fire was 450 rounds a minute, even though 250 rpm in short bursts was more practical. The total ammunition load for both weapons was 1,200 rounds and the discharged cases fell into canvas bags placed under the guns. The MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, so that fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

The Kugelblitz turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body was hanging in a ring mount, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s top and kept the profile very low. The turret offered full overhead protection, 360° traverse and space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition – even though it was very cramped. Elevation of the weapons (as well as of the crew sitting inside of the turret!) was from -5° to +80°, turning speed was 60°/sec.

The commander/gunner, who had a small observation cupola on top of the turret, was positioned in the middle, behind the main guns. The two gunner assistants were placed on the left and right side in front of him, in a slightly lower position. The assistant situated left of the guns was responsible for the turret’s movements, the one on the right side was responsible for loading the guns, and the spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors..

 

However, the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz SPAAG was ill-fated: A production rate of 30 per month by December 1944 was planned, but never achieved, because tank production had become seriously hampered and production of the Panzer IV was about to be terminated in favor of the new E-series tank family. Therefore, almost all Flakpanzer IV with the Kugelblitz turret were conversions of existing hulls, mostly coming from repair shops.

In parallel, work was under way to adapt the Kugelblitz turret to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer hull, too, which was still in production in the former Czechoslovakian Skoda works, and to the new, light E-10 and E-25 tank chassis. Due to this transitional and slightly chaotic situation, production numbers of the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz remained limited - in early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production already ceased in May.

 

By that time, the Kugelblitz turret had been successfully adapted to the Hetzer chassis, even though this had called for major adaptations of the upper hull due to the relatively wide turret ring, which originally came from the Tiger I. The conversion worked and the unique turret could be successfully shoehorned into the Hetzer basis, making it a very compact and relatively light vehicle – it was 5 tons lighter than the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz” SPAAG.

In order to carry the turret, the welded upper hull had to be widened and the glacis plate was reinforced with an extra plate, which also covered the Hetzer’s original opening for its 75 mm gun. The resulting 60 mm (2.36 in) thick front plate was inclined 60 degrees from the vertical, and therefore offered around 120 mm (4.72 in) of effective protection – much better than the Panzer IV’s almost vertical 50 mm (or 80 mm with additional armor on late versions). In this form, the vehicle could withstand direct frontal hits from most medium Allied tanks. The side walls were rather thin, though, only 20 mm, and they became more vertical to make room for the turret mount. The engine cover behind the turret had to be modified, too. Due to the massive changes, the vehicle received a new, separate designation, “Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sd.Kfz.) 170” and it was officially called “Leichter Flakpanzer 38(t) 3 cm“.

 

However, there were many drawbacks. The interior was cramped: the self-contained Kugelblitz turret itself already lacked internal space, but the driver – the only crew member in the hull – also had little space in front of the turret’s mount and he could only access his working place through an opening in the turret at the commander’s feet when it was in a level forward position. There was no dedicated hatch for the driver, only an emergency escape scuttle in the floor.

Another issue was the field of view from inside for everyone. As already mentioned, the driver did not have a hatch that could be used for a good view when not driving under fire. He also only had a single panoramic sight, so that he could just see what was going on directly in front of him. There were no side view openings, and especially the right side of the vehicle was literally blind. The crew in the turret also could only rely on forward-facing sights, just the commander had a rotating periscope. But due to its position, the areas directly along the vehicle’s flanks and its rear remained wide blind areas that made it very vulnerable to infantry attacks. This flaw was even worsened by the fact that there were no additional light weapons available (or even deployable from the inside) for close range defense – the Panzer IV-based SPAAGs carried a hull-mounted machine gun. And the crew had, due to the open weapon stations a much better field of view or could directly use their own light weapons.

 

With the turret’s additional weight (the Sd.Kfz. 170 was 3 tons heavier than the Hetzer), and despite a slightly uprated petrol engine, the tank was rather underpowered, especially off road. Another negative side effect of the turret was a considerably raised center of gravity. The original Hetzer was a nimble vehicle with good handling, but the Sd.Kfz. 170 was hard to control, tended to build up and roll even on the road and its off-road capabilities were markedly hampered by the concentration of weight so high above the ground, making it prone to tip over to the side when the driver did not take care of terrain slope angles. This wobbly handling, as well as the turret’s shape, gave the vehicle the unofficial nickname “Kugelhetzer”.

 

Nevertheless, all these flaws were accepted, since the Sd.Kfz. 170. was, like its Panzer IV-based predecessors, urgently needed and only regarded as an interim solution until a light E-Series chassis had been adapted to the turret. It was also surmised that the vehicle would not operate independently and rather escort other troops, so that close-range protection was in most cases ensured. Under this premise, about 100 Sd.Kfz. 170s were built until early 1946, when production of the Hetzer and its components were stopped. Operationally, the vehicle was not popular (esp. among drivers), but it was quite successful, not only against aircraft (esp. when used in conjunction with the new mobile radar-based fire direction centers), but also against lightly armored ground targets.

Plans to stretch the hull for more internal space, better field performance and crew comfort as well as replacing the engine with a bigger and more powerful 8 cylinder Tatra engine were never executed, since all resources were allocated to the new E-series tanks.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Four (commander/gunner, 2 assistants incl. radio operator, driver)

Weight: 18 tons (22.000 lb)

Length: 4.61 m (15 ft 1 in)

Width: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Height: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Ground clearance: 40 cm (15 ¾ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 320 litres (85 US gal)

 

Armor:

10 – 60 mm (0.39 – 2.36 in)

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 42 km/h (26 mph)

Sustained road speed: 36 km/h (22.3 mph)

Off-road speed: 26 km/h (16 mph)

Operational range: 177 km (110 mi)

Power/weight: 10 PS/t

 

Engine:

Praga 6-cylinder 7.8 liter petrol engine, delivering 180 PS (178 hp, 130 kW) at 2,800 rpm

 

Transmission:

Praga-Wilson Typ CV with 5 forwards and 1 reverse gears

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

The so-called “Kugelhetzer” was a real German project in late WWII, but it was rather a vague idea, it never it made to the hardware stage. Even from its predecessor, the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz”, only five tanks were actually built. However, I found the idea interesting, since the combination of existing elements would lead to a very compact SPAAG. And since I had a spare Kugelblitz turret from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” SF mecha kits at hand, I decided to build a model of this conceptual tank.

 

The chassis is a Bergepanzer 38(t), a.k.a. “Bergehetzer”, from UM Models, an unarmed recovery tank based on the Hetzer hull with an open top. For my conversion plan it offered the benefit of a blank glacis plate and lots of spare parts for future builds. However, upon inspection of the parts-not-intended-to-be-mated I became slightly disillusioned: while the Hetzer’s upper original hull offers enough room for the ball turret itself to be inserted into the roof, it could NEVER take the turret bearing and the armored collar ring around it. They already are hard to mount on a Panzer IV hull, but the Hetzer is an even smaller vehicle, despite its casemate layout. I was about to shelf the project again, but then decided to modify and adapt the upper hull to the turret. In real life the engineers would have taken a similar route.

 

I started to scratch the superstructure from 0.5mm styrene sheet, and work started with the roof that had to be wide enough to carry the turret ring. This was glued into place on top of the hull, and from this benchmark the rest of the “armor plates” was added – starting with the engine bay cover, then adding side walls and finally the more complex corner sections, which actually consist of two triangular plates, but only one of them was actually fitted. The leftover openings were filled with acrylic putty, also in order to fill and stabilize the void between the original hull and the added plates. Later, the necessary space for the ball turret was carved away from the original hull, so that the Kugelblitz turret could be inserted in its new opening. Sounds complicated, but the construction was less complicated than expected, and it looked even better!

 

Once mated with the lower chassis, some details had to be added to the blank surfaces – e. g. racks with spare barrels for the guns and some tools and stowage boxes. These were taken from the Bergehetzer kit and partly modified to match the different hull.

What really became a challenge was the assembly of the tracks upon the model’s completion. Unfortunately, they consist of single elements and even links that have to be glued to the wheels, and since they were not crisply molded (just like the sprocket drive wheels) their installation was a rather tedious affair.

  

Painting and markings:

This is another variation of the “Hinterhalt” concept, using the three basic tones of Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). In this case – as an autumn scheme with fading light and more red and brown leaves - I used a late-war Panther as reference and gave the vehicle a rather dark basic livery consisting of green and the brown, and on top of that I added counter-colored (green on brown and brown on green) mottles, plus contrast mottles in Dunkelgelb. The tones I used were Humbrol 83, 86 and 113 - the latter is not the standard tone for the Hinterhalt scheme (180 would be appropriate), but it comes close to the typical German red Oxidrot (RAL 3009) primer, which was not only used on bare tank hulls during production but was also integrated into camouflage schemes, frequently stretched and lightened through additives. Effectively the livery is very standard, and since this Kugelhetzer model would depict a standard production vehicle and not a conversion, I extended the camouflage to the turret, too, for a consistent look.

The wheels remained in a single color (just the basic red brown and green), since camouflage was prohibited to be extended onto moving parts of the vehicle: a swirling pattern would have been very obvious and eye-catching when the vehicle was on the move.

 

A washing with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint followed. The decals – mostly taken from the small OOB sheet – came next, and I settled upon simplified national markings and just white outlines for the tactical code, due to the rather murky camouflage underneath.

The model’s main components were sealed with matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can before their final assembly, and I did some dry-brushing with light grey to emphasize details and edges. Finally, a coat of pigment dust was applied to the model’s lower areas and used to hide some flaws along the fiddly tracks.

  

A conclusive outcome, and a more complex build than obvious at first sight. The re-built upper hull was easier to realize than expected, the true horror came with the assembly of the tracks which consist of tiny, not really crisply molded elements. Why the return track section has to be constructed of five(!) segments - even though it's a straight line - is beyond my comprehension, too.

However, the outcome looks quite good, even though the use of the original Hetzer hull would have created several problems, if the original Kugelblitz turret had had to be integrated. Esp. the lack of space for the driver (and a suitable access hatch!) make this design idea rather unpractical, so that a stretched hull (AFAIK there’s a model of such a modified vehicle available) would have made sense.

Jeep Renegade

 

World car makers have predicted that smaller compact SUV’s will become big choices for buyer in 2015 and beyond. Jeep is telling me that the all new Jeep Renegade is the most capable vehicle in it’s class. But I am suspicious that it’s not right for two reasons. One it is way too ...

 

www.testmiles.com/the-jeep-renegade-capable-being-jeep/

With advances in bomber technology, the US Army Air Corps in 1937 began to wonder if its current fighters were inadequate to defend the nation from attack. The USAAC, on the advice of Lieutenant Benjamin Kelsey, issued Proposal X-608/609, calling for an interceptor equipped with tricycle landing gear and the Allison V-1710 inline engine, heavy cannon armament, and capable of 360 mph and a ceiling of above 20,000 feet, which it had to reach within six minutes. The design could either be twin-engined (X-608) or single-engined (X-609). The latter resulted in the Bell P-39 Airacobra—the former became the Lockheed P-38 Lightning.

 

The proposal was a tough one, and after several discarded designs, Lockheed designer Clarence “Kelly” Johnson settled on an unusual planform: two engines extending back to twin tails, joined by the wings and tailplane, with the pilot and armament concentrated in a central “gondola” fuselage. The reason for the tail “booms” was that the aircraft needed superchargers, and the only place to put them was behind the engines. The design itself posed a number of problems, namely engine torque: twin-engined propeller aircraft tend to pull heavily in the direction of the torque. Johnson solved this by having the propellers counter-rotate away from each other, canceling the torque between them. Putting all the guns along a central axis in front of the pilot also made shooting more accurate and easier to figure out; various armament options were tried before Lockheed settled on four machine guns and a single 20mm cannon. Flush rivets and stainless steel construction gave the aircraft a smooth finish and better speed. The first XP-38 flew in January 1939. To prove the fighter’s usefulness to a skeptical USAAC, the XP-38 was flown cross-country from Lockheed’s plant at Burbank, California, to New York City. It crashed due to engine icing just short of New York, but it made the trip in just over seven hours at a sustained speed of 399 mph, a new record.

 

Impressed, the USAAC ordered 13 YP-38 pre-production aircraft, but these were delayed by Lockheed already being at maximum production, with the result that the first YP-38 did not reach the now-US Army Air Force until June 1941. It had already been ordered by the Royal Air Force, but now a new problem came up: the P-38 was too hot an aircraft. In dives, it had been found that the P-38 would quickly enter compressibility and keep accelerating until it hit the ground, due to the air over the wings becoming supersonic while the aircraft remained subsonic. Frantic efforts by Lockheed to end the problem failed, and despite the introduction of dive brakes on later aircraft, the P-38 was never cured of this problem. The British only held to their order of 143 aircraft after legal action by Lockheed—making matters worse was that RAF aircraft were delivered without counter-rotating propellers or superchargers, making them difficult to control and at a severe disadvantage above 15,000 feet. Lack of adequate cockpit heating meant that the pilot risked hypothermia during the cold European winters. The RAF had named the aircraft “Lightning” for its performance, but loathed the fighter and were all too happy to return them to Lockheed. The P-38, which had finally entered production as the P-38D Lightning, had acquired a bad reputation that it would never wholly shed.

 

Despite its misgivings, the USAAF continued the Lightning in production, because whatever the aircraft’s other problems, it could not be matched in speed or range. Deployed to Iceland and the Aleutian Islands, P-38s scored the first American kill of the European theater on 14 August 1942; it had already scored its first kills, over the Aleutians, a week before. Deployed to North Africa to cover the Torch landings and operations in Tunisia, the heavy armament, speed, range, and surprising ease of flying (the P-38 used a wheel rather than a stick), the Lightning earned the nicknamed Gabelschwanzteufel (Fork-Tailed Devil) from its German opponents at first. Unfortunately, the Germans soon discovered the P-38’s weakness—it still was a poor performer above 15,000 feet, it had a very slow roll rate, and lethal blind spots. It was liked by its pilots, who pointed out that it was the only long-range escort then available, and the only one that could lose an engine and stay in the air, but its poor reputation persisted. Even after further combat proved its worth and improvements by Lockheed resulted in the P-38J, the 8th Air Force began relegating its P-38s to ground attack duties (which, surprisingly, it was good at) in favor of the P-51. It remained in Europe until war’s end, operating as attack aircraft and F-5 reconnaissance aircraft; a few were further modified with a bombardier position in a clear nose as pathfinders, the so-called “Droopsnoot.” Despite its reputation, European Lightnings produced a number of aces, including Robin Olds; French author and aviation pioneer Antoine de Saint-Exupery was killed during a P-38 reconnaissance mission in 1944.

 

In the Pacific, however, the P-38 excelled. The USAAF lacked any sort of long-range fighter, and the P-38 allowed safer operations over water and distance. This led to it being chosen to shoot down Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in 1943, as it was the only fighter that could make the trip from Guadalcanal to Bougainville. General George Kenney, commanding the 15th Air Force, asked for all the P-38s Lockheed could supply. While it was no dogfighter, especially with the nimble Japanese fighters, it could snap turn with an A6M Zero for the first few seconds, it was better in the vertical than Japanese aircraft, and its heavy armament would obliterate any enemy that got in front of it. Whereas P-38 pilots in Europe froze, the lack of air conditioning in the Pacific meant that P-38 pilots there flew in only shorts, tennis shoes, and flight helmet. The P-38’s lack of high altitude performance was not a problem in the Pacific, where most air combat took place at low level. Over 100 men would become aces in the Lightning, including Richard Bong, Thomas McGuire, and Charles McDonald; with 1800 confirmed victories, the P-38 was the most successful USAAF fighter in the Pacific.

 

After the end of World War II, jet fighters spelled the end of the P-38. Though it would persist in Italian Air Force service until 1956, and was used by Nationalist China and some Central American nations (a CIA-flown P-38M was instrumental in a 1954 coup), nearly all had been scrapped by the mid-1950s. Of 10,037 Lightnings produced, today only 24 aircraft survive, with half flyable.

 

This P-38L is 44-53087, which was deployed to the Pacific and briefly saw combat. It was converted to a P-38M nightfighter, but the war ended before it could see any night action. Returned to the United States, it was sold as surplus. In 1951, 44-53087 was sold to a Canadian aerial survey firm, and the original nose was replaced with a bubble nose fitted with cameras. It would pass through no less than 14 owners in three countries before it was acquired by aviation enthusiast Peter Kahn, who restored it with an original nose back to P-38L standard. Kahn in turn sold it to aerial stunt coordinator Wilson "Connie" Edwards, who donated 44-53087 to the EAA AirVenture Museum in 1981.

 

After its long odyssey, today 44-53087 sits at rest at Oshkosh, though in theory it is still flyable. It is displayed as 44-532236, Richard Bong's famous "Marge," named for Bong's fiancee (and later wife), Marge Vattendahl. Most of Bong's 40 kills--which made him America's top ace of World War II and any war--were scored in 44-532236. The fate of the real "Marge" is unknown, but several aircraft have been painted in Bong's colors, including this one. Like all of the EAA's collection, it is in pristine condition. Bong was assigned to the 49th Fighter Group, based at Tacloban in the Philippines for the last year of the war.

BVLOS capable, visual light and thermal cam, 30 minutes flight time, LTE (4G) + 2.4 GHz (backup) remode control + HD video streams, real-time object detection. ArduCopter flight stack. Gimbal stabilization. 236g only!

With the beginning of the atomic age and the Cold War, the United Kingdom needed a bomber force capable of both carrying the enormous nuclear weapons of the age, and the ability to penetrate the air defenses of the Soviet Union. The Royal Air Force’s then primary bomber, the Avro Lincoln, could barely do the former and would never survive the latter, so the RAF issued a specification for a jet bomber. Avro, Handley-Page, and Vickers all responded with designs, all of which were good enough that the RAF accepted all three. This would become the famous “V-Force,” with the Handley-Page Victor, the Vickers Valiant, and the Avro Vulcan.

 

Initially designed by Roy Chadwick, who designed all of Avro’s wartime bombers, the Vulcan was to be the most radical, using delta wing technology. The delta wing offered the most lift and least drag, extending range and fuel efficiency, while also providing the most volume for nuclear weapons and for future developments. So radical was the Vulcan design that Avro built fighter-size test aircraft, the Avro 707, to prove that the delta wing was feasible.

 

The first Vulcan took to the air in 1952, and exceeded the RAF’s requirements—it was a “pilot’s airplane”: reliable, fast, and responsive enough to be capable of aerobatics. An unplanned benefit, one not realized until later, was that the Vulcan’s design was actually quite stealthy, with a radar cross-section much lower than its contemporaries. Combined with an advanced and robust ECM system, the Vulcan was to prove itself quite capable of penetrating air defenses, despite its lack of defensive armament. Buffeting caused the wing to be redesigned from the prototype Vulcan B.1 to the definitive Vulcan B.2, with a “kinked” delta. This delayed entry of the Vulcan into RAF Bomber Command until 1956, making it the last of the V-bombers to enter service.

 

As it had aerial refueling capability, the Vulcan had global reach, and RAF bomber units were regularly deployed outside of England, to bases in Cyprus and Singapore. If the Vulcan had a weakness, it was not in the design itself: the intention was to equip the Vulcan with the American Skybolt air-launched ballistic missile, but Skybolt was cancelled in 1962, leaving the Vulcan to be equipped with Yellow Sun freefall nuclear bombs, and later the Blue Steel standoff weapon—both would have still required a lengthy penetration of the Soviet Union. To train crews in doing so, Vulcans regularly participated in exercises with the USAF’s Strategic Air Command in Big Voice bombing competitions (and later Red Flag), and Operation Skyshield, simulated attacks on American cities from bases in England.

 

As the UK switched its nuclear deterrent force to Polaris submarine-launched ballistic missiles, the Vulcans were also switched to the tactical nuclear role in 1970, and became the sole aerial portion of Britain’s nuclear force as the Valiant was retired and the Victor converted to role of tanker. Since tactical nuclear bombs could also be carried by much smaller aircraft such as the Buccaneer and Jaguar, the Vulcan was somewhat overqualified for this role. With the RAF adapting the Panavia Tornado GR.1 in 1979, the Vulcan force began to be retired—and ironically, would see its only combat action in the twilight of its career, in the 1982 Falklands War.

 

As the Argentinian-occupied Falkland Islands lay 4000 miles from the nearest British base at Ascension Island, only the Vulcan possessed the range to reach Port Stanley’s airport, which posed a threat to the Royal Navy task force bearing down on the island. Compounding the problems facing the British was that the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm lacked a “Wild Weasel” suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD) aircraft. Five Vulcans were deployed to Ascension, hastily modified with American AGM-45 Shrikes mounted on the old Skybolt pylons. Supported by Victor tankers, which were required to refuel the Vulcans five times, and codenamed Black Buck, these Vulcans were able to do significant damage to the Port Stanley airfield, as well as degrade the Argentinian surface-to-air missile sites; no Vulcans were lost in the raids, though one aircraft was forced to land in Brazil and was interned for the remainder of the war.

 

Black Buck was the Vulcan’s swan song, and the type was completely replaced by the Tornado by 1984; it was the last strategic bomber operated by the RAF. Of 136 aircraft produced, about 18 survive in museums, with one aircraft preserved in flyable condition.

 

This picture was taken by Mr. John Osterholm at Lincoln AFB in 1965, during a goodwill visit by a RAF Vulcan to an airshow there. It still retains the older roundel and antiflash white undersides of the Vulcan force. Vulcans were surprisingly not uncommon at North American airshows, though they tended to visit Canada more than the United States. Mr. Osterholm has given me permission to post this picture from his collection.

 

(Thanks to Bigbirdavn below for correcting me--this is a Vulcan B.2, not B.1.)

 

Posted via email to ☛ HoloChromaCinePhotoRamaScope‽: cdevers.posterous.com/enterprise-0. See the full gallery on Posterous ...

 

• • • • •

 

See more photos of this, and the Wikipedia article.

 

Details, quoting from Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Space Shuttle Enterprise:

 

Manufacturer:

Rockwell International Corporation

 

Country of Origin:

United States of America

 

Dimensions:

Overall: 57 ft. tall x 122 ft. long x 78 ft. wing span, 150,000 lb.

(1737.36 x 3718.57 x 2377.44cm, 68039.6kg)

 

Materials:

Aluminum airframe and body with some fiberglass features; payload bay doors are graphite epoxy composite; thermal tiles are simulated (polyurethane foam) except for test samples of actual tiles and thermal blankets.

 

The first Space Shuttle orbiter, "Enterprise," is a full-scale test vehicle used for flights in the atmosphere and tests on the ground; it is not equipped for spaceflight. Although the airframe and flight control elements are like those of the Shuttles flown in space, this vehicle has no propulsion system and only simulated thermal tiles because these features were not needed for atmospheric and ground tests. "Enterprise" was rolled out at Rockwell International's assembly facility in Palmdale, California, in 1976. In 1977, it entered service for a nine-month-long approach-and-landing test flight program. Thereafter it was used for vibration tests and fit checks at NASA centers, and it also appeared in the 1983 Paris Air Show and the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans. In 1985, NASA transferred "Enterprise" to the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum.

 

Transferred from National Aeronautics and Space Administration

 

• • •

 

Quoting from Wikipedia | Space Shuttle Enterprise:

 

The Space Shuttle Enterprise (NASA Orbiter Vehicle Designation: OV-101) was the first Space Shuttle orbiter. It was built for NASA as part of the Space Shuttle program to perform test flights in the atmosphere. It was constructed without engines or a functional heat shield, and was therefore not capable of spaceflight.

 

Originally, Enterprise had been intended to be refitted for orbital flight, which would have made it the second space shuttle to fly after Columbia. However, during the construction of Columbia, details of the final design changed, particularly with regard to the weight of the fuselage and wings. Refitting Enterprise for spaceflight would have involved dismantling the orbiter and returning the sections to subcontractors across the country. As this was an expensive proposition, it was determined to be less costly to build Challenger around a body frame (STA-099) that had been created as a test article. Similarly, Enterprise was considered for refit to replace Challenger after the latter was destroyed, but Endeavour was built from structural spares instead.

  

Service

 

Construction began on the first orbiter on June 4, 1974. Designated OV-101, it was originally planned to be named Constitution and unveiled on Constitution Day, September 17, 1976. A write-in campaign by Trekkies to President Gerald Ford asked that the orbiter be named after the Starship Enterprise, featured on the television show Star Trek. Although Ford did not mention the campaign, the president—who during World War II had served on the aircraft carrier USS Monterey (CVL-26) that served with USS Enterprise (CV-6)—said that he was "partial to the name" and overrode NASA officials.

 

The design of OV-101 was not the same as that planned for OV-102, the first flight model; the tail was constructed differently, and it did not have the interfaces to mount OMS pods. A large number of subsystems—ranging from main engines to radar equipment—were not installed on this vehicle, but the capacity to add them in the future was retained. Instead of a thermal protection system, its surface was primarily fiberglass.

 

In mid-1976, the orbiter was used for ground vibration tests, allowing engineers to compare data from an actual flight vehicle with theoretical models.

 

On September 17, 1976, Enterprise was rolled out of Rockwell's plant at Palmdale, California. In recognition of its fictional namesake, Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry and most of the principal cast of the original series of Star Trek were on hand at the dedication ceremony.

 

Approach and landing tests (ALT)

 

Main article: Approach and Landing Tests

 

On January 31, 1977, it was taken by road to Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, to begin operational testing.

 

While at NASA Dryden, Enterprise was used by NASA for a variety of ground and flight tests intended to validate aspects of the shuttle program. The initial nine-month testing period was referred to by the acronym ALT, for "Approach and Landing Test". These tests included a maiden "flight" on February 18, 1977 atop a Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA) to measure structural loads and ground handling and braking characteristics of the mated system. Ground tests of all orbiter subsystems were carried out to verify functionality prior to atmospheric flight.

 

The mated Enterprise/SCA combination was then subjected to five test flights with Enterprise unmanned and unactivated. The purpose of these test flights was to measure the flight characteristics of the mated combination. These tests were followed with three test flights with Enterprise manned to test the shuttle flight control systems.

 

Enterprise underwent five free flights where the craft separated from the SCA and was landed under astronaut control. These tests verified the flight characteristics of the orbiter design and were carried out under several aerodynamic and weight configurations. On the fifth and final glider flight, pilot-induced oscillation problems were revealed, which had to be addressed before the first orbital launch occurred.

 

On August 12, 1977, the space shuttle Enterprise flew on its own for the first time.

 

Preparation for STS-1

 

Following the ALT program, Enterprise was ferried among several NASA facilities to configure the craft for vibration testing. In June 1979, it was mated with an external tank and solid rocket boosters (known as a boilerplate configuration) and tested in a launch configuration at Kennedy Space Center Launch Pad 39A.

 

Retirement

 

With the completion of critical testing, Enterprise was partially disassembled to allow certain components to be reused in other shuttles, then underwent an international tour visiting France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the U.S. states of California, Alabama, and Louisiana (during the 1984 Louisiana World Exposition). It was also used to fit-check the never-used shuttle launch pad at Vandenberg AFB, California. Finally, on November 18, 1985, Enterprise was ferried to Washington, D.C., where it became property of the Smithsonian Institution.

 

Post-Challenger

 

After the Challenger disaster, NASA considered using Enterprise as a replacement. However refitting the shuttle with all of the necessary equipment needed for it to be used in space was considered, but instead it was decided to use spares constructed at the same time as Discovery and Atlantis to build Endeavour.

 

Post-Columbia

 

In 2003, after the breakup of Columbia during re-entry, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board conducted tests at Southwest Research Institute, which used an air gun to shoot foam blocks of similar size, mass and speed to that which struck Columbia at a test structure which mechanically replicated the orbiter wing leading edge. They removed a fiberglass panel from Enterprise's wing to perform analysis of the material and attached it to the test structure, then shot a foam block at it. While the panel was not broken as a result of the test, the impact was enough to permanently deform a seal. As the reinforced carbon-carbon (RCC) panel on Columbia was 2.5 times weaker, this suggested that the RCC leading edge would have been shattered. Additional tests on the fiberglass were canceled in order not to risk damaging the test apparatus, and a panel from Discovery was tested to determine the effects of the foam on a similarly-aged RCC leading edge. On July 7, 2003, a foam impact test created a hole 41 cm by 42.5 cm (16.1 inches by 16.7 inches) in the protective RCC panel. The tests clearly demonstrated that a foam impact of the type Columbia sustained could seriously breach the protective RCC panels on the wing leading edge.

 

The board determined that the probable cause of the accident was that the foam impact caused a breach of a reinforced carbon-carbon panel along the leading edge of Columbia's left wing, allowing hot gases generated during re-entry to enter the wing and cause structural collapse. This caused Columbia to spin out of control, breaking up with the loss of the entire crew.

 

Museum exhibit

 

Enterprise was stored at the Smithsonian's hangar at Washington Dulles International Airport before it was restored and moved to the newly built Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum's Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center at Dulles International Airport, where it has been the centerpiece of the space collection. On April 12, 2011, NASA announced that Space Shuttle Discovery, the most traveled orbiter in the fleet, will be added to the collection once the Shuttle fleet is retired. When that happens, Enterprise will be moved to the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in New York City, to a newly constructed hangar adjacent to the museum. In preparation for the anticipated relocation, engineers evaluated the vehicle in early 2010 and determined that it was safe to fly on the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft once again.

Incense is aromatic biotic material that releases fragrant smoke when burned. The term refers to the material itself, rather than to the aroma that it produces. Incense is used for aesthetic reasons, and in therapy, meditation, and ceremony. It may also be used as a simple deodorant or insectifuge.

 

Incense is composed of aromatic plant materials, often combined with essential oils. The forms taken by incense differ with the underlying culture, and have changed with advances in technology and increasing number of uses.

 

Incense can generally be separated into two main types: "indirect-burning" and "direct-burning". Indirect-burning incense (or "non-combustible incense") is not capable of burning on its own, and requires a separate heat source. Direct-burning incense (or "combustible incense") is lit directly by a flame and then fanned or blown out, leaving a glowing ember that smoulders and releases a smoky fragrance. Direct-burning incense is either a paste formed around a bamboo stick, or a paste that is extruded into a stick or cone shape.

 

HISTORY

The word incense comes from Latin incendere meaning "to burn".

 

Combustible bouquets were used by the ancient Egyptians, who employed incense in both pragmatic and mystical capacities. Incense was burnt to counteract or obscure malodorous products of human habitation, but was widely perceived to also deter malevolent demons and appease the gods with its pleasant aroma. Resin balls were found in many prehistoric Egyptian tombs in El Mahasna, giving evidence for the prominence of incense and related compounds in Egyptian antiquity. One of the oldest extant incense burners originates from the 5th dynasty. The Temple of Deir-el-Bahari in Egypt contains a series of carvings that depict an expedition for incense.

 

The Babylonians used incense while offering prayers to divining oracles. Incense spread from there to Greece and Rome.

 

Incense burners have been found in the Indus Civilization (3300–1300 BCE). Evidence suggests oils were used mainly for their aroma. India also adopted techniques from East Asia, adapting the formulation to encompass aromatic roots and other indigenous flora. This was the first usage of subterranean plant parts in incense. New herbs like Sarsaparilla seeds, frankincense, and cypress were used by Indians.

 

At around 2000 BCE, Ancient China began the use of incense in the religious sense, namely for worship. Incense was used by Chinese cultures from Neolithic times and became more widespread in the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. The earliest documented use of incense comes from the ancient Chinese, who employed incense composed of herbs and plant products (such as cassia, cinnamon, styrax, and sandalwood) as a component of numerous formalized ceremonial rites. Incense usage reached its peak during the Song dynasty with numerous buildings erected specifically for incense ceremonies.

 

Brought to Japan in the 6th century by Korean Buddhist monks, who used the mystical aromas in their purification rites, the delicate scents of Koh (high-quality Japanese incense) became a source of amusement and entertainment with nobles in the Imperial Court during the Heian Era 200 years later. During the 14th-century Ashikaga shogunate, a samurai warrior might perfume his helmet and armor with incense to achieve an aura of invincibility (as well as to make a noble gesture to whoever might take his head in battle). It wasn't until the Muromachi period during the 15th and 16th century that incense appreciation (kōdō) spread to the upper and middle classes of Japanese society.

 

COMPOSITION

A variety of materials have been used in making incense. Historically there has been a preference for using locally available ingredients. For example, sage and cedar were used by the indigenous peoples of North America. Trading in incense materials comprised a major part of commerce along the Silk Road and other trade routes, one notably called the Incense Route.

 

Local knowledge and tools were extremely influential on the style, but methods were also influenced by migrations of foreigners, such as clergy and physicians.

 

COMBUSTIBLE BASE

The combustible base of a direct burning incense mixture not only binds the fragrant material together but also allows the produced incense to burn with a self-sustained ember, which propagates slowly and evenly through an entire piece of incense with such regularity that it can be used to mark time. The base is chosen such that it does not produce a perceptible smell. Commercially, two types of incense base predominate:

 

Fuel and oxidizer mixtures: Charcoal or wood powder provides the fuel for combustion while an oxidizer such as sodium nitrate or potassium nitrate sustains the burning of the incense. Fragrant materials are added to the base prior to shaping, as in the case of powdered incense materials, or after, as in the case of essential oils. The formula for charcoal-based incense is superficially similar to black powder, though it lacks the sulfur.

Natural plant-based binders: Gums such as Gum Arabic or Gum Tragacanth are used to bind the mixture together. Mucilaginous material, which can be derived from many botanical sources, is mixed with fragrant materials and water. The mucilage from the wet binding powder holds the fragrant material together while the cellulose in the powder combusts to form a stable ember when lit. The dry binding powder usually comprises about 10% of the dry weight in the finished incense. These include:

Makko (incense powder) made from the bark of various trees in the genus Persea (such as Persea thunbergii)

Xiangnan pi (made from the bark of trees of genus Phoebe such as Phoebe nanmu or Persea zuihoensis.

Jigit: a resin based binder used in India

Laha or Dar: bark based powders used in Nepal, Tibet, and other East Asian countries.

 

Typical compositions burn at a temperature between 220 °C and 260 °C.

 

TYPES

Incense is available in various forms and degrees of processing. They can generally be separated into "direct-burning" and "indirect-burning" types. Preference for one form or another varies with culture, tradition, and personal taste. The two differ in their composition due to the former's requirement for even, stable, and sustained burning.

 

INDIRECT-BURNING

Indirect-burning incense, also called "non-combustible incense", is an aromatic material or combination of materials, such as resins, that does not contain combustible material and so requires a separate heat source. Finer forms tend to burn more rapidly, while coarsely ground or whole chunks may be consumed very gradually, having less surface area. Heat is traditionally provided by charcoal or glowing embers. In the West, the best known incense materials of this type are the resins frankincense and myrrh, likely due to their numerous mentions in the Bible. Frankincense means "pure incense", though in common usage refers specifically to the resin of the boswellia tree.

 

Whole: The incense material is burned directly in raw form on top of coal embers.

Powdered or granulated: Incense broken into smaller pieces burns quickly and provides brief but intense odor.

Paste: Powdered or granulated incense material is mixed with a sticky incombustible binder, such as dried fruit, honey, or a soft resin and then formed to balls or small pastilles. These may then be allowed to mature in a controlled environment where the fragrances can commingle and unite. Much Arabian incense, also called "Bukhoor" or "Bakhoor", is of this type, and Japan has a history of kneaded incense, called nerikō or awasekō, made using this method. Within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, raw frankincense is ground into a fine powder and then mixed with various sweet-smelling essential oils.

 

DIRECT-BURNING

Direct-burning incense, also called "combustible incense", is lit directly by a flame. The glowing ember on the incense will continue to smoulder and burn the rest of the incense without further application of external heat or flame. Direct-burning incense is either extruded, pressed into forms, or coated onto a supporting material. This class of incense is made from a moldable substrate of fragrant finely ground (or liquid) incense materials and odourless binder. The composition must be adjusted to provide fragrance in the proper concentration and to ensure even burning. The following types are commonly encountered, though direct-burning incense can take nearly any form, whether for expedience or whimsy.

 

Coil: Extruded and shaped into a coil without a core, coil incense can burn for an extended period, from hours to days, and is commonly produced and used in Chinese cultures.

 

Cone: Incense in this form burns relatively quickly. Incense cones were invented in Japan in the 1800s.

Cored stick: A supporting core of bamboo is coated with a thick layer of incense material that burns away with the core. Higher-quality variations have fragrant sandalwood cores. This type of incense is commonly produced in India and China. When used in Chinese folk religion, these are sometimes known as "joss sticks".

Dhoop or solid stick: With no bamboo core, dhoop incense is easily broken for portion control. This is the most commonly produced form of incense in Japan and Tibet.

Powder: The loose incense powder used for making indirect burning incense is sometimes burned without further processing. Powder incense is typically packed into long trails on top of wood ash using a stencil and burned in special censers or incense clocks.

Paper: Paper infused with incense, folded accordion style, is lit and blown out. Examples include Carta d'Armenia and Papier d'Arménie.

Rope: The incense powder is rolled into paper sheets, which are then rolled into ropes, twisted tightly, then doubled over and twisted again, yielding a two-strand rope. The larger end is the bight, and may be stood vertically, in a shallow dish of sand or pebbles. The smaller (pointed) end is lit. This type of incense is easily transported and stays fresh for extremely long periods. It has been used for centuries in Tibet and Nepal.

 

Moxa tablets, which are disks of powdered mugwort used in Traditional Chinese medicine for moxibustion, are not incenses; the treatment is by heat rather than fragrance.

Incense sticks may be termed joss sticks, especially in parts of East Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia. Among ethnic Chinese and Chinese-influenced communities these are traditionally burned at temples, before the threshold of a home or business, before an image of a religious divinity or local spirit, or in shrines, large and small, found at the main entrance of every village. Here the earth god is propitiated in the hope of bringing wealth and health to the village. They can also be burned in front of a door or open window as an offering to heaven, or the devas. The word "joss" is derived from the Latin deus (god) via the Portuguese deos through the Javanese dejos, through Chinese pidgin English.

 

PRODUCTION

The raw materials are powdered and then mixed together with a binder to form a paste, which, for direct burning incense, is then cut and dried into pellets. Incense of the Athonite Orthodox Christian tradition is made by powdering frankincense or fir resin, mixing it with essential oils. Floral fragrances are the most common, but citrus such as lemon is not uncommon. The incense mixture is then rolled out into a slab approximately 1 cm thick and left until the slab has firmed. It is then cut into small cubes, coated with clay powder to prevent adhesion, and allowed to fully harden and dry. In Greece this rolled incense resin is called 'Moskolibano', and generally comes in either a pink or green colour denoting the fragrance, with pink being rose and green being jasmine.

 

Certain proportions are necessary for direct-burning incense:

 

Oil content: an excess of oils may prevent incense from smoldering effectively. Resinous materials such as myrrh and frankincense are typically balanced with "dry" materials such as wood, bark and leaf powders.

Oxidizer quantity: Too little oxidizer in gum-bound incense may prevent the incense from igniting, while too much will cause the incense to burn too quickly, without producing fragrant smoke.

Binder: Water-soluble binders such as "makko" ensure that the incense mixture does not crumble when dry, dilute the mixture.

Mixture density: Incense mixtures made with natural binders must not be combined with too much water in mixing, or over-compressed while being formed, which would result in either uneven air distribution or undesirable density in the mixture, causing the incense to burn unevenly, too slowly, or too quickly.

Particulate size: The incense mixture has to be well pulverized with similarly sized particulates. Uneven and large particulates result in uneven burning and inconsistent aroma production when burned.

 

"Dipped" or "hand-dipped" direct-burning incense is created by dipping "incense blanks" made of unscented combustible dust into any suitable kind of essential or fragrance oil. These are often sold in the United States by flea-market and sidewalk vendors who have developed their own styles. This form of incense requires the least skill and equipment to manufacture, since the blanks are pre-formed in China or South East Asia.

 

Incense mixtures can be extruded or pressed into shapes. Small quantities of water are combined with the fragrance and incense base mixture and kneaded into a hard dough. The incense dough is then pressed into shaped forms to create cone and smaller coiled incense, or forced through a hydraulic press for solid stick incense. The formed incense is then trimmed and slowly dried. Incense produced in this fashion has a tendency to warp or become misshapen when improperly dried, and as such must be placed in climate-controlled rooms and rotated several times through the drying process.

 

Traditionally, the bamboo core of cored stick incense is prepared by hand from Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. pubescens since this species produces thick wood and easily burns to ashes in the incense stick. In a process known as "splitting the foot of the incense stick", the bamboo is trimmed to length, soaked, peeled, and split in halves until the thin sticks of bamboo have square cross sections of less than 3mm. This process has been largely replaced by machines in modern incense production.

 

In the case of cored incensed sticks, several methods are employed to coat the sticks cores with incense mixture:

 

Paste rolling: A wet, malleable paste of incense mixture is first rolled into a long, thin coil, using a paddle. Then, a thin stick is put next to the coil and the stick and paste are rolled together until the stick is centered in the mixture and the desired thickness is achieved. The stick is then cut to the desired length and dried.

Powder-coating: Powder-coating is used mainly to produce cored incense of either larger coil (up to 1 meter in diameter) or cored stick forms. A bundle of the supporting material (typically thin bamboo or sandalwood slivers) is soaked in water or a thin water/glue mixture for a short time. The thin sticks are evenly separated, then dipped into a tray of incense powder consisting of fragrance materials and occasionally a plant-based binder. The dry incense powder is then tossed and piled over the sticks while they are spread apart. The sticks are then gently rolled and packed to maintain roundness while more incense powder is repeatedly tossed onto the sticks. Three to four layers of powder are coated onto the sticks, forming a 2 mm thick layer of incense material on the stick. The coated incense is then allowed to dry in open air. Additional coatings of incense mixture can be applied after each period of successive drying. Incense sticks produced in this fashion and burned in temples of Chinese folk religion can have a thickness between 2 and 4 millimeters.

Compression: A damp powder is mechanically formed around a cored stick by compression, similar to the way uncored sticks are formed. This form is becoming more common due to the higher labor cost of producing powder-coated or paste-rolled sticks.

 

BURNING INCENSE

Indirect-burning incense burned directly on top of a heat source or on a hot metal plate in a censer or thurible.

 

In Japan a similar censer called a egōro (柄香炉) is used by several Buddhist sects. The egōro is usually made of brass, with a long handle and no chain. Instead of charcoal, makkō powder is poured into a depression made in a bed of ash. The makkō is lit and the incense mixture is burned on top. This method is known as sonae-kō (religious burning).

 

For direct-burning incense, the tip or end of the incense is ignited with a flame or other heat source until the incense begins to turn into ash at the burning end. The flame is then fanned or blown out, leaving the incense to smolder.

 

CULTURAL VARIATIONS

ARABIAN

In most Arab countries, incense is burned in the form of scented chips or blocks called bakhoor (Arabic: بخور‎ [bɑˈxuːɾ, bʊ-]. Incense is used on special occasions like weddings or on Fridays or generally to perfume the house. The bakhoor is usually burned in a mabkhara, a traditional incense burner (censer) similar to the Somali Dabqaad. It is customary in many Arab countries to pass bakhoor among the guests in the majlis ('congregation'). This is done as a gesture of hospitality.

 

CHINESE

For over two thousand years, the Chinese have used incense in religious ceremonies, ancestor veneration, Traditional Chinese medicine, and daily life. Agarwood (chénxiāng) and sandalwood (tánxiāng) are the two most important ingredients in Chinese incense.

 

Along with the introduction of Buddhism in China came calibrated incense sticks and incense clocks. The first known record is by poet Yu Jianwu (487-551): "By burning incense we know the o'clock of the night, With graduated candles we confirm the tally of the watches." The use of these incense timekeeping devices spread from Buddhist monasteries into Chinese secular society.

Incense-stick burning is an everyday practice in traditional Chinese religion. There are many different types of stick used for different purposes or on different festive days. Many of them are long and thin. Sticks are mostly coloured yellow, red, or more rarely, black. Thick sticks are used for special ceremonies, such as funerals. Spiral incense, with exceedingly long burn times, is often hung from temple ceilings. In some states, such as Taiwan,

 

Singapore, or Malaysia, where they celebrate the Ghost Festival, large, pillar-like dragon incense sticks are sometimes used. These generate so much smoke and heat that they are only burned outside.

 

Chinese incense sticks for use in popular religion are generally odorless or only use the slightest trace of jasmine or rose, since it is the smoke, not the scent, which is important in conveying the prayers of the faithful to heaven. They are composed of the dried powdered bark of a non-scented species of cinnamon native to Cambodia, Cinnamomum cambodianum. Inexpensive packs of 300 are often found for sale in Chinese supermarkets. Though they contain no sandalwood, they often include the Chinese character for sandalwood on the label, as a generic term for incense.

 

Highly scented Chinese incense sticks are used by some Buddhists. These are often quite expensive due to the use of large amounts of sandalwood, agarwood, or floral scents used. The sandalwood used in Chinese incenses does not come from India, its native home, but rather from groves planted within Chinese territory. Sites belonging to Tzu Chi, Chung Tai Shan, Dharma Drum Mountain, Xingtian Temple, or City of Ten Thousand Buddhas do not use incense.

 

INDIAN

Incense sticks, also known as agarbathi (or agarbatti) and joss sticks, in which an incense paste is rolled or moulded around a bamboo stick, are the main forms of incense in India. The bamboo method originated in India, and is distinct from the Nepali/Tibetan and Japanese methods of stick making without bamboo cores. Though the method is also used in the west, it is strongly associated with India.

 

The basic ingredients are the bamboo stick, the paste (generally made of charcoal dust and joss/jiggit/gum/tabu powder – an adhesive made from the bark of litsea glutinosa and other trees), and the perfume ingredients - which would be a masala (spice mix) powder of ground ingredients into which the stick would be rolled, or a perfume liquid sometimes consisting of synthetic ingredients into which the stick would be dipped. Perfume is sometimes sprayed on the coated sticks. Stick machines are sometimes used, which coat the stick with paste and perfume, though the bulk of production is done by hand rolling at home. There are about 5,000 incense companies in India that take raw unperfumed sticks hand-rolled by approximately 200,000 women working part-time at home, and then apply their own brand of perfume, and package the sticks for sale. An experienced home-worker can produce 4,000 raw sticks a day. There are about 50 large companies that together account for up to 30% of the market, and around 500 of the companies, including a significant number of the main ones, including Moksh Agarbatti and Cycle Pure, are based in Mysore.

 

JEWISH TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM

KETORET

Ketoret was the incense offered in the Temple in Jerusalem and is stated in the Book of Exodus to be a mixture of stacte, onycha, galbanum and frankincense.

 

TIBETAN

Tibetan incense refers to a common style of incense found in Tibet, Nepal, and Bhutan. These incenses have a characteristic "earthy" scent to them. Ingredients vary from cinnamon, clove, and juniper, to kusum flower, ashvagandha, and sahi jeera.

 

Many Tibetan incenses are thought to have medicinal properties. Their recipes come from ancient Vedic texts that are based on even older Ayurvedic medical texts. The recipes have remained unchanged for centuries.

 

JAPANESE

In Japan incense appreciation folklore includes art, culture, history, and ceremony. It can be compared to and has some of the same qualities as music, art, or literature. Incense burning may occasionally take place within the tea ceremony, just like calligraphy, ikebana, and scroll arrangement. The art of incense appreciation, or koh-do, is generally practiced as a separate art form from the tea ceremony, and usually within a tea room of traditional Zen design.

 

Agarwood (沈香 Jinkō) and sandalwood (白檀 byakudan) are the two most important ingredients in Japanese incense. Agarwood is known as "jinkō" in Japan, which translates as "incense that sinks in water", due to the weight of the resin in the wood. Sandalwood is one of the most calming incense ingredients and lends itself well to meditation. It is also used in the Japanese tea ceremony. The most valued Sandalwood comes from Mysore in the state of Karnataka in India.

 

Another important ingredient in Japanese incense is kyara (伽羅). Kyara is one kind of agarwood (Japanese incense companies divide agarwood into 6 categories depending on the region obtained and properties of the agarwood). Kyara is currently worth more than its weight in gold.

 

Some terms used in Japanese incense culture include:

 

Incense arts: [香道, kodo]

Agarwood: [ 沈香 ] – from heartwood from Aquilaria trees, unique, the incense wood most used in incense ceremony, other names are: lignum aloes or aloeswood, gaharu, jinko, or oud.

Censer/Incense burner: [香爐] – usually small and used for heating incense not burning, or larger and used for burning

Charcoal: [木炭] – only the odorless kind is used.

Incense woods: [ 香木 ] – a naturally fragrant resinous wood.

 

USAGE

PRACTICAL

Incense fragrances can be of such great strength that they obscure other less desirable odours. This utility led to the use of incense in funerary ceremonies because the incense could smother the scent of decay. An example, as well as of religious use, is the giant Botafumeiro thurible that swings from the ceiling of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. It is used in part to mask the scent of the many tired, unwashed pilgrims huddled together in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.

 

A similar utilitarian use of incense can be found in the post-Reformation Church of England. Although the ceremonial use of incense was abandoned until the Oxford Movement, it was common to have incense (typically frankincense) burned before grand occasions, when the church would be crowded. The frankincense was carried about by a member of the vestry before the service in a vessel called a 'perfuming pan'. In iconography of the day, this vessel is shown to be elongated and flat, with a single long handle on one side. The perfuming pan was used instead of the thurible, as the latter would have likely offended the Protestant sensibilities of the 17th and 18th centuries.

 

The regular burning of direct-burning incense has been used for chronological measurement in incense clocks. These devices can range from a simple trail of incense material calibrated to burn in a specific time period, to elaborate and ornate instruments with bells or gongs, designed to involve multiple senses.

 

Incense made from materials such as citronella can repel mosquitoes and other irritating, distracting, or pestilential insects. This use has been deployed in concert with religious uses by Zen Buddhists who claim that the incense that is part of their meditative practice is designed to keep bothersome insects from distracting the practitioner. Currently, more effective pyrethroid-based mosquito repellent incense is widely available in Asia.

 

Papier d'Arménie was originally sold as a disinfectant as well as for the fragrance.

 

Incense is also used often by people who smoke indoors and do not want the smell to linger.

 

AESTHETIC

Many people burn incense to appreciate its smell, without assigning any other specific significance to it, in the same way that the foregoing items can be produced or consumed solely for the contemplation or enjoyment of the aroma. An example is the kōdō (香道), where (frequently costly) raw incense materials such as agarwood are appreciated in a formal setting.

 

RELIGIOUS

Religious use of incense is prevalent in many cultures and may have roots in the practical and aesthetic uses, considering that many of these religions have little else in common. One common motif is incense as a form of sacrificial offering to a deity. Such use was common in Judaic worship and remains in use for example in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican churches, Taoist and Buddhist Chinese jingxiang (敬香 "offer incense), etc.

 

Aphrodisiac Incense has been used as an aphrodisiac in some cultures. Both ancient Greek and ancient Egyptian mythology suggest the usage of incense by goddesses and nymphs. Incense is thought to heighten sexual desires and sexual attraction.

 

Time-keeper Incense clocks are used to time social, medical and religious practices in parts of eastern Asia. They are primarily used in Buddhism as a timer of mediation and prayer. Different types of incense burn at different rates; therefore, different incense are used for different practices. The duration of burning ranges from minutes to months.

 

Healing stone cleanser Incense is claimed to cleanse and restore energy in healing stones. The technique used is called “smudging” and is done by holding a healing stone over the smoke of burning incense for 20 to 30 seconds. Some people believe that this process not only restores energy but eliminates negative energy.

 

HEALTH RISK FROM INCENSE SMOKE

Incense smoke contains various contaminants including gaseous pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and adsorbed toxic pollutants (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxic metals). The solid particles range between ~10 and 500 nm. In a comparison, Indian sandalwood was found to have the highest emission rate, followed by Japanese aloeswood, then Taiwanese aloeswood, while Chinese smokeless sandalwood had the least.

 

Research carried out in Taiwan in 2001 linked the burning of incense sticks to the slow accumulation of potential carcinogens in a poorly ventilated environment by measuring the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (including benzopyrene) within Buddhist temples. The study found gaseous aliphatic aldehydes, which are carcinogenic and mutagenic, in incense smoke.

 

A survey of risk factors for lung cancer, also conducted in Taiwan, noted an inverse association between incense burning and adenocarcinoma of the lung, though the finding was not deemed significant.

 

In contrast, epidemiologists at the Hong Kong Anti-Cancer Society, Aichi Cancer Center in Nagoya, and several other centers found: "No association was found between exposure to incense burning and respiratory symptoms like chronic cough, chronic sputum, chronic bronchitis, runny nose, wheezing, asthma, allergic rhinitis, or pneumonia among the three populations studied: i.e. primary school children, their non-smoking mothers, or a group of older non-smoking female controls. Incense burning did not affect lung cancer risk among non-smokers, but it significantly reduced risk among smokers, even after adjusting for lifetime smoking amount." However, the researchers qualified their findings by noting that incense burning in the studied population was associated with certain low-cancer-risk dietary habits, and concluded that "diet can be a significant confounder of epidemiological studies on air pollution and respiratory health."

 

Although several studies have not shown a link between incense and lung cancer, many other types of cancer have been directly linked to burning incense. A study published in 2008 in the medical journal Cancer found that incense use is associated with a statistically significant higher risk of cancers of the upper respiratory tract, with the exception of nasopharyngeal cancer. Those who used incense heavily also were 80% more likely to develop squamous-cell carcinomas. The link between incense use and increased cancer risk held when the researchers weighed other factors, including cigarette smoking, diet and drinking habits. The research team noted that "This association is consistent with a large number of studies identifying carcinogens in incense smoke, and given the widespread and sometimes involuntary exposure to smoke from burning incense, these findings carry significant public health implications."

 

In 2015, the South China University of Technology found toxicity of incense to Chinese hamsters' ovarian cells to be even higher than cigarettes.

 

Incensole acetate, a component of Frankincense, has been shown to have anxiolytic-like and antidepressive-like effects in mice, mediated by activation of poorly-understood TRPV3 ion channels in the brain.

 

WIKIPEDIA

Fred Denn and Bryan Fabbri check and maintain solar radiation instruments at the Chemistry and Physics Atmospheric Boundary Layer Experiment (CAPABLE) onsite at NASA Langley in Hampton, Virginia. The site is a collaborative effort between NASA Langley, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Together these partners operate a suite of instrumentation designed to track and observe pollutants in the Earth’s troposphere. capable.larc.nasa.gov

 

Image credit: NASA LaRC

The Hamilcar was a WW2 transport glider capable of carrying a light tank. They were used during Operation Tonga (Normandy, June 1944), Operation Market Garden (Arnhem, September 1944) and finally in Operation Varsity (Wesel, March 1945). Some remained in use post-war for training.

These remains, believed to be from TK718, were in use as a private garage in Wiltshire before being recovered in 1990 for display. The tank is a Tetrarch (Light Tank MkVII) which were regularly flown in Hamilcars.

On display at The Tank Museum, Bovington, Dorset, UK.

26-7-2016

+++ 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 Douglas A-4 Skyhawk was a single seat subsonic carrier-capable attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta winged, single turbojet engined Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. It was originally designated A4D under the U.S. Navy's pre-1962 designation system.

 

The Skyhawk was a relatively lightweight aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 24,500 pounds (11,100 kg) in its late versions and had a top speed of more than 670 miles per hour (1,080 km/h). The aircrafts supported a variety of missiles, bombs and other munitions, and late versions were capable of carrying a bomb load equivalent to that of a World War II-era Boeing B-17 bomber.

 

The type saw an intensive career with the US Navy and the US Marine Corps, and is still in frontline use in several countries, e. g. Brazil and Argentina.

Another potential user was France. The story began with two different design requirements in the early 1950s for land-based, light fighters, one for the French Air Force and the other for NATO air forces. French manufacturer Dassault responded and used the same basic design for both these specifications, designated as the Étendard II and Étendard VI respectively, neither of which received any orders, though. The company also developed a larger and more powerful variant, which was called the Mystère XXIV, simultaneously as a private venture.

 

The French Navy, the Aéronavale, showed interest in the more powerful aircraft, and this interest in a lulti-purpose fighter for carrier operations led to a public competition which was opened to foreign submissions, too. Dassault constructed a prototype navalized version of the Mystère XXIV, now designated Étendard IVM, and the first prototype conducted its first flight on 24 July 1956. As contenders, Douglas offered a modified A4D-2 Skyhawk and from Great Britain the Supermarine Scimitar was proposed, but immediately rejected as being much too large and complex for the Aéronavale's needs.

 

In order to compare the potential contenders, the Étendard IVM was to be pitted against the Skyhawk, and so a total of six so-called A4D-2Fs, modified to French specifications, took part in an extensive field test over the course of the next 15 months against a total of seven Étendard prototypes (the last being a prototype for the Étendard IVP photo reconnaissance variant), which differed by engines and equipment details.

 

The French Skyhawk variant had, compared with the standard A4D-2 of the US Navy, improved navigation and flight control systems. The A4D-2F also featured a strengthened airframe and had air-to-air refueling capabilities. Specific to these machines were a TACAN receiver and a braking parachute under the tail for land operations.

 

Internal armament was, upon the potential customer’s request, changed from the original pair of American 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk 12 cannon with 200 RPG in the wing roots to a pair of 30mm DEFA cannon with 150 RPG. As a marketing measure, the A4D-2F was equipped with guidance avionics for the American AGM-12 Bullpup missile, in hope that France would procure this weapon together with the aircraft as a package and open the door for further weapon exports. Other ordnance included rocket pods, bombs, and drop tanks, carried on five external pylons (two more under the outer wings than the standard A4D-2).

 

Not being convinced of the AGM-12 and political preference of domestic equipment, French officials insisted on additional avionics for indigenous guided weapons like the Nord AA-20 air-to-air or the AS-20 air-to-ground missiles, as well as for the bigger, newly developed AS-30. Since the internal space of the AD4 airframe was limited, these additional components had to be housed in a long, spinal fairing that extended from the fin root forward, almost up to the cockpit. Another consequence of the scarce internal space was the need to provide radio-guidance for the French missiles through an external antenna pod, which was to be carried under the outer starboard pylon, together with two missiles on the inner pylons and an SNEB unguided missile pod (frequently empty) under the port outer pylon as aerodynamic counterbalance.

 

Trials between the contenders started in summer 1957, at first from land bases (primarily Landviseau in Brittany), but later, after its reconstruction with a four degree angled flight deck and a mirror landing sight, also aboard of the revamped French carrier ‘Arromanches’ (R 95, former HMS Colossus). The A4D-2F turned out to be the more effective fighter bomber, especially concerning the almost twice as high weapon load as the Étendard’s. On the other side, the Étendard benefitted from its Aida radar (the A4D-2F only had an AN/APN-141 radar altimeter and a state-of-the-art AN/ASN-19A navigation computer) and from strong supporters from both military and political deciders. Dassault kept lobbying for the indigenous aircraft, too, and, despite many shortcomings and limitations, the Étendard was chosen as the winning design. Even a proposed radar upgrade (just introduced with the A4D-3/A-4C for the US Navy) was during the late evaluation stages in 1958 would not change the French officials’ minds.

 

“Sufficiently satisfied” with its performance, the French Navy would procure for 69 Étendard IVM fighters and 21 Étendard IVP reconnaissance versions. The sextet of test Skyhawks was returned in late 1961 to the United States, where the airframes were at first stored and later underwent modifications at Lockheed Service Co. to become A-4Ps for the Argentine Air Force, delivered in 1966.

 

From 1962, the winning Étendard IVM was being deployed aboard the service's newly built Clemenceau-class aircraft carriers, the Clemenceau and Foch. Later, in 1972, the Skyhawk (in the form of a modified A-4M) made a return to France as an alternative to the stillborn Jaguar M, a navalized variant of the Anglo-French SEPECAT Jaguar, which was intended to become the Étendard's replacement. But this effort was once more derailed by political lobbying by Dassault, who favored their own proposed upgraded version of the aircraft, which would later enter service as the Super Étendard.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 39' 4" (12 m)

Wingspan: 26 ft 6 in (8.38 m)

Height: 15 ft (4.57 m)

Wing area: 259 ft² (24.15 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 0008-1.1-25 root, NACA 0005-0.825-50 tip

Empty weight: 9,146 lb (4,152 kg)

Loaded weight: 18,300 lb (8,318 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 lb (11,136 kg)

 

Powerplant:

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

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 575 kn (661 mph, 1,064 km/h)

Range: 1,700 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,220 km)

Combat radius: 625 nmi, 1,158 km

Service ceiling: 42,250 ft (12,880 m)

Rate of climb: 8,440 ft/min (43 m/s)

Wing loading: 70.7 lb/ft² (344.4 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.51

g-limit: +8/-3 g

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA cannon, 150 RPG, in the wing roots

Total effective payload of up to 5,000 lbs (2,268 kg) on five hardpoints

- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lbs capability

- 2× Inboard wing: 2,200 lbs capability each

- 2× Outboard wing: 1,000 lbs capability each

   

The kit and its assembly:

This is another contribution to the “In the Navy” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com. The idea of a French Navy Skyhawk is not new and has been tackled before (in the form of CG renditions and model hardware alike), and I had been wanting to build one, too, for a long time – and the current GB was a good occasion to tackle a build.

 

The Skyhawk was actually tested by the Aéronavale, but, as described in the background, not until the early 1970s and together with the LTV A-7, when the Jaguar M came to nothing, not in the late 1950ies where this fictional model is rooted.

Anyway, I liked the Fifties idea much and spun a story around the Étendard’s introduction and a fictional competition for the Aéronavale’s next carrier-borne fighter bomber. The idea was further fueled by the relatively new Airfix model of the early A-4B, which would fit well into the project’s time frame. And I already had a respective kit stashed away for this project...

 

The Airfix kit is very nice, fit and detail (including, for instance a complete air intake section with a jet fan dummy, and it features a very good pilot figure, too) are excellent, even though some things like very thick sprue attachment points here and there and the waxy, rather soft styrene are a bit dubious. But it’s a good kit, nevertheless, and cleverly constructed: many seams disappear between natural panel lines, it’s a pleasant build.

 

Since this model was to be a kind of pre-production machine based on a relatively new standard aircraft, not much was changed. Most visible additions are the dorsal spine (a simple piece of sprue, blended onto the back and into the fin fillet) and the ordnance.

But there are minor changes, too: The cannon installation was also modified, from the original wing root position into slightly lower, bulged fairings for the more voluminous DEFA cannon. The fairings were carved from styrene profiles and outfitted with the OOB barrels. IDF Skyhawks/Ahit with 30mm cannons were the design benchmark, blending the fairings into the curved wing roots and hiding the original gun openings was actually the most challenging part of the build.

 

Some pitots and blade antennae were replaced or changed, too. Lead was cramped into the space between the cockpit and the air intake installation for a proper stance. The Airfix kit is in so far nice as this compartment is easily accessible from below, as long as the wings have not been mounted yet.

The cockpit, together with the pilot figure, were taken OOB, just the pilot’s head was modified to look sideways and an ejection trigger handle was added to the seat.

 

The pair of AS-30 once were AS-30Ls from an Italeri Mirage 2000 kit, slightly modified with a simple, conical tip and booster rocket nozzles on the tail. The corresponding underwing radar pod is a drop tank from a vintage Airfix Kaman Seasprite, while the other outer pylon carries a scratched camera pod, IIRC it once was a belly tank from a 1:144 F-16.

  

Painting and markings:

On purpose, relatively simple. The early French Étendard IVM was the benchmark with its blue-gray/white livery. Biggest challenges were actually to find an appropriate tone for the upper gray, which appears, much like the British Extra Dark Sea Gray, between anything from dark blue to medium gray, depending on light and surroundings, esp. with a glossy finish.

I could not find any definitive or convincing paint suggestions, what I found ranges between FS 36270 (Medium Gray, much too light) and FS 36118 (Gunship Gray, much too violet) and Humbrol 77 (Navy Blue, much too green) to a mix of Humbrol 57 and 33 (Sky Blue + Black!). Really weird… And to make matters worse, some Étendards were furthermore painted in a lighter blue-gray for operations over the Mediterranean Sea!

 

Since I wanted a unique tone, I settled upon Revell 79 (RAL 7031, Blaugrau) for the upper surfaces, a dark, petrol blue gray. The undersides were painted in an off-white tone (a grayish Volkswagen color from the Seventies!) with acrylic paint from the rattle can – with the benefit that the whole landing gear could be primed in the same turn, even though it was later painted over with pure white (Humbrol 130), which was also used on/in the air intakes. The cockpit interior was painted in bluish gray (FS 35237), the interior of the air brakes, slats and edges of the landing gear covers became bright red (Humbrol 60). The red markings around the air intakes were created with paint and decals. Another eye-catcher are the bright orange AS-30 test rounds.

 

A thin, black ink wash was applied to the kit in order to emphasize the engraved panel lines. Only light shading was added to the panels through dry-brushing, more for presentation drama than true weathering.

 

Most Aéronavale-specific markings come from an Academy Super Étendard decal sheet, most stencils come from the OOB Skyhawk sheet. As a kind of prototype and part of Douglas’ fictional marketing effort for the machine, I placed the French roundels in six positions and also added French flags ( the Étendard prototypes were similarly decorated, by the way). Finally, everything was sealed under a coat of matt varnish with a slight, sheen finish.

  

A relatively simple whif project, and a nice distraction from the many recent kitbashes and major conversions. The Aéronavale livery suits the Scooter well, and what I personally like a lot about this one is that it “tells the story” behind it – it’s more than a generic Skyhawk in French colors.

 

And, as a final twist of history, nowadays the Skyhawk actually IS in use on board of a French carrier: in the form of the Brazilian Naval Aviation’s AF-1, former Kuwaiti A-4KU airframes, from CV Sao Paulo, former French Navy carrier Foch! :D

 

Incense is aromatic biotic material that releases fragrant smoke when burned. The term refers to the material itself, rather than to the aroma that it produces. Incense is used for aesthetic reasons, and in therapy, meditation, and ceremony. It may also be used as a simple deodorant or insectifuge.

 

Incense is composed of aromatic plant materials, often combined with essential oils. The forms taken by incense differ with the underlying culture, and have changed with advances in technology and increasing number of uses.

 

Incense can generally be separated into two main types: "indirect-burning" and "direct-burning". Indirect-burning incense (or "non-combustible incense") is not capable of burning on its own, and requires a separate heat source. Direct-burning incense (or "combustible incense") is lit directly by a flame and then fanned or blown out, leaving a glowing ember that smoulders and releases a smoky fragrance. Direct-burning incense is either a paste formed around a bamboo stick, or a paste that is extruded into a stick or cone shape.

 

HISTORY

The word incense comes from Latin incendere meaning "to burn".

 

Combustible bouquets were used by the ancient Egyptians, who employed incense in both pragmatic and mystical capacities. Incense was burnt to counteract or obscure malodorous products of human habitation, but was widely perceived to also deter malevolent demons and appease the gods with its pleasant aroma. Resin balls were found in many prehistoric Egyptian tombs in El Mahasna, giving evidence for the prominence of incense and related compounds in Egyptian antiquity. One of the oldest extant incense burners originates from the 5th dynasty. The Temple of Deir-el-Bahari in Egypt contains a series of carvings that depict an expedition for incense.

 

The Babylonians used incense while offering prayers to divining oracles. Incense spread from there to Greece and Rome.

 

Incense burners have been found in the Indus Civilization (3300–1300 BCE). Evidence suggests oils were used mainly for their aroma. India also adopted techniques from East Asia, adapting the formulation to encompass aromatic roots and other indigenous flora. This was the first usage of subterranean plant parts in incense. New herbs like Sarsaparilla seeds, frankincense, and cypress were used by Indians.

 

At around 2000 BCE, Ancient China began the use of incense in the religious sense, namely for worship. Incense was used by Chinese cultures from Neolithic times and became more widespread in the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. The earliest documented use of incense comes from the ancient Chinese, who employed incense composed of herbs and plant products (such as cassia, cinnamon, styrax, and sandalwood) as a component of numerous formalized ceremonial rites. Incense usage reached its peak during the Song dynasty with numerous buildings erected specifically for incense ceremonies.

 

Brought to Japan in the 6th century by Korean Buddhist monks, who used the mystical aromas in their purification rites, the delicate scents of Koh (high-quality Japanese incense) became a source of amusement and entertainment with nobles in the Imperial Court during the Heian Era 200 years later. During the 14th-century Ashikaga shogunate, a samurai warrior might perfume his helmet and armor with incense to achieve an aura of invincibility (as well as to make a noble gesture to whoever might take his head in battle). It wasn't until the Muromachi period during the 15th and 16th century that incense appreciation (kōdō) spread to the upper and middle classes of Japanese society.

 

COMPOSITION

A variety of materials have been used in making incense. Historically there has been a preference for using locally available ingredients. For example, sage and cedar were used by the indigenous peoples of North America. Trading in incense materials comprised a major part of commerce along the Silk Road and other trade routes, one notably called the Incense Route.

 

Local knowledge and tools were extremely influential on the style, but methods were also influenced by migrations of foreigners, such as clergy and physicians.

 

COMBUSTIBLE BASE

The combustible base of a direct burning incense mixture not only binds the fragrant material together but also allows the produced incense to burn with a self-sustained ember, which propagates slowly and evenly through an entire piece of incense with such regularity that it can be used to mark time. The base is chosen such that it does not produce a perceptible smell. Commercially, two types of incense base predominate:

 

Fuel and oxidizer mixtures: Charcoal or wood powder provides the fuel for combustion while an oxidizer such as sodium nitrate or potassium nitrate sustains the burning of the incense. Fragrant materials are added to the base prior to shaping, as in the case of powdered incense materials, or after, as in the case of essential oils. The formula for charcoal-based incense is superficially similar to black powder, though it lacks the sulfur.

Natural plant-based binders: Gums such as Gum Arabic or Gum Tragacanth are used to bind the mixture together. Mucilaginous material, which can be derived from many botanical sources, is mixed with fragrant materials and water. The mucilage from the wet binding powder holds the fragrant material together while the cellulose in the powder combusts to form a stable ember when lit. The dry binding powder usually comprises about 10% of the dry weight in the finished incense. These include:

Makko (incense powder) made from the bark of various trees in the genus Persea (such as Persea thunbergii)

Xiangnan pi (made from the bark of trees of genus Phoebe such as Phoebe nanmu or Persea zuihoensis.

Jigit: a resin based binder used in India

Laha or Dar: bark based powders used in Nepal, Tibet, and other East Asian countries.

 

Typical compositions burn at a temperature between 220 °C and 260 °C.

 

TYPES

Incense is available in various forms and degrees of processing. They can generally be separated into "direct-burning" and "indirect-burning" types. Preference for one form or another varies with culture, tradition, and personal taste. The two differ in their composition due to the former's requirement for even, stable, and sustained burning.

 

INDIRECT-BURNING

Indirect-burning incense, also called "non-combustible incense", is an aromatic material or combination of materials, such as resins, that does not contain combustible material and so requires a separate heat source. Finer forms tend to burn more rapidly, while coarsely ground or whole chunks may be consumed very gradually, having less surface area. Heat is traditionally provided by charcoal or glowing embers. In the West, the best known incense materials of this type are the resins frankincense and myrrh, likely due to their numerous mentions in the Bible. Frankincense means "pure incense", though in common usage refers specifically to the resin of the boswellia tree.

 

Whole: The incense material is burned directly in raw form on top of coal embers.

Powdered or granulated: Incense broken into smaller pieces burns quickly and provides brief but intense odor.

Paste: Powdered or granulated incense material is mixed with a sticky incombustible binder, such as dried fruit, honey, or a soft resin and then formed to balls or small pastilles. These may then be allowed to mature in a controlled environment where the fragrances can commingle and unite. Much Arabian incense, also called "Bukhoor" or "Bakhoor", is of this type, and Japan has a history of kneaded incense, called nerikō or awasekō, made using this method. Within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, raw frankincense is ground into a fine powder and then mixed with various sweet-smelling essential oils.

 

DIRECT-BURNING

Direct-burning incense, also called "combustible incense", is lit directly by a flame. The glowing ember on the incense will continue to smoulder and burn the rest of the incense without further application of external heat or flame. Direct-burning incense is either extruded, pressed into forms, or coated onto a supporting material. This class of incense is made from a moldable substrate of fragrant finely ground (or liquid) incense materials and odourless binder. The composition must be adjusted to provide fragrance in the proper concentration and to ensure even burning. The following types are commonly encountered, though direct-burning incense can take nearly any form, whether for expedience or whimsy.

 

Coil: Extruded and shaped into a coil without a core, coil incense can burn for an extended period, from hours to days, and is commonly produced and used in Chinese cultures.

 

Cone: Incense in this form burns relatively quickly. Incense cones were invented in Japan in the 1800s.

Cored stick: A supporting core of bamboo is coated with a thick layer of incense material that burns away with the core. Higher-quality variations have fragrant sandalwood cores. This type of incense is commonly produced in India and China. When used in Chinese folk religion, these are sometimes known as "joss sticks".

Dhoop or solid stick: With no bamboo core, dhoop incense is easily broken for portion control. This is the most commonly produced form of incense in Japan and Tibet.

Powder: The loose incense powder used for making indirect burning incense is sometimes burned without further processing. Powder incense is typically packed into long trails on top of wood ash using a stencil and burned in special censers or incense clocks.

Paper: Paper infused with incense, folded accordion style, is lit and blown out. Examples include Carta d'Armenia and Papier d'Arménie.

Rope: The incense powder is rolled into paper sheets, which are then rolled into ropes, twisted tightly, then doubled over and twisted again, yielding a two-strand rope. The larger end is the bight, and may be stood vertically, in a shallow dish of sand or pebbles. The smaller (pointed) end is lit. This type of incense is easily transported and stays fresh for extremely long periods. It has been used for centuries in Tibet and Nepal.

 

Moxa tablets, which are disks of powdered mugwort used in Traditional Chinese medicine for moxibustion, are not incenses; the treatment is by heat rather than fragrance.

Incense sticks may be termed joss sticks, especially in parts of East Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia. Among ethnic Chinese and Chinese-influenced communities these are traditionally burned at temples, before the threshold of a home or business, before an image of a religious divinity or local spirit, or in shrines, large and small, found at the main entrance of every village. Here the earth god is propitiated in the hope of bringing wealth and health to the village. They can also be burned in front of a door or open window as an offering to heaven, or the devas. The word "joss" is derived from the Latin deus (god) via the Portuguese deos through the Javanese dejos, through Chinese pidgin English.

 

PRODUCTION

The raw materials are powdered and then mixed together with a binder to form a paste, which, for direct burning incense, is then cut and dried into pellets. Incense of the Athonite Orthodox Christian tradition is made by powdering frankincense or fir resin, mixing it with essential oils. Floral fragrances are the most common, but citrus such as lemon is not uncommon. The incense mixture is then rolled out into a slab approximately 1 cm thick and left until the slab has firmed. It is then cut into small cubes, coated with clay powder to prevent adhesion, and allowed to fully harden and dry. In Greece this rolled incense resin is called 'Moskolibano', and generally comes in either a pink or green colour denoting the fragrance, with pink being rose and green being jasmine.

 

Certain proportions are necessary for direct-burning incense:

 

Oil content: an excess of oils may prevent incense from smoldering effectively. Resinous materials such as myrrh and frankincense are typically balanced with "dry" materials such as wood, bark and leaf powders.

Oxidizer quantity: Too little oxidizer in gum-bound incense may prevent the incense from igniting, while too much will cause the incense to burn too quickly, without producing fragrant smoke.

Binder: Water-soluble binders such as "makko" ensure that the incense mixture does not crumble when dry, dilute the mixture.

Mixture density: Incense mixtures made with natural binders must not be combined with too much water in mixing, or over-compressed while being formed, which would result in either uneven air distribution or undesirable density in the mixture, causing the incense to burn unevenly, too slowly, or too quickly.

Particulate size: The incense mixture has to be well pulverized with similarly sized particulates. Uneven and large particulates result in uneven burning and inconsistent aroma production when burned.

 

"Dipped" or "hand-dipped" direct-burning incense is created by dipping "incense blanks" made of unscented combustible dust into any suitable kind of essential or fragrance oil. These are often sold in the United States by flea-market and sidewalk vendors who have developed their own styles. This form of incense requires the least skill and equipment to manufacture, since the blanks are pre-formed in China or South East Asia.

 

Incense mixtures can be extruded or pressed into shapes. Small quantities of water are combined with the fragrance and incense base mixture and kneaded into a hard dough. The incense dough is then pressed into shaped forms to create cone and smaller coiled incense, or forced through a hydraulic press for solid stick incense. The formed incense is then trimmed and slowly dried. Incense produced in this fashion has a tendency to warp or become misshapen when improperly dried, and as such must be placed in climate-controlled rooms and rotated several times through the drying process.

 

Traditionally, the bamboo core of cored stick incense is prepared by hand from Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. pubescens since this species produces thick wood and easily burns to ashes in the incense stick. In a process known as "splitting the foot of the incense stick", the bamboo is trimmed to length, soaked, peeled, and split in halves until the thin sticks of bamboo have square cross sections of less than 3mm. This process has been largely replaced by machines in modern incense production.

 

In the case of cored incensed sticks, several methods are employed to coat the sticks cores with incense mixture:

 

Paste rolling: A wet, malleable paste of incense mixture is first rolled into a long, thin coil, using a paddle. Then, a thin stick is put next to the coil and the stick and paste are rolled together until the stick is centered in the mixture and the desired thickness is achieved. The stick is then cut to the desired length and dried.

Powder-coating: Powder-coating is used mainly to produce cored incense of either larger coil (up to 1 meter in diameter) or cored stick forms. A bundle of the supporting material (typically thin bamboo or sandalwood slivers) is soaked in water or a thin water/glue mixture for a short time. The thin sticks are evenly separated, then dipped into a tray of incense powder consisting of fragrance materials and occasionally a plant-based binder. The dry incense powder is then tossed and piled over the sticks while they are spread apart. The sticks are then gently rolled and packed to maintain roundness while more incense powder is repeatedly tossed onto the sticks. Three to four layers of powder are coated onto the sticks, forming a 2 mm thick layer of incense material on the stick. The coated incense is then allowed to dry in open air. Additional coatings of incense mixture can be applied after each period of successive drying. Incense sticks produced in this fashion and burned in temples of Chinese folk religion can have a thickness between 2 and 4 millimeters.

Compression: A damp powder is mechanically formed around a cored stick by compression, similar to the way uncored sticks are formed. This form is becoming more common due to the higher labor cost of producing powder-coated or paste-rolled sticks.

 

BURNING INCENSE

Indirect-burning incense burned directly on top of a heat source or on a hot metal plate in a censer or thurible.

 

In Japan a similar censer called a egōro (柄香炉) is used by several Buddhist sects. The egōro is usually made of brass, with a long handle and no chain. Instead of charcoal, makkō powder is poured into a depression made in a bed of ash. The makkō is lit and the incense mixture is burned on top. This method is known as sonae-kō (religious burning).

 

For direct-burning incense, the tip or end of the incense is ignited with a flame or other heat source until the incense begins to turn into ash at the burning end. The flame is then fanned or blown out, leaving the incense to smolder.

 

CULTURAL VARIATIONS

ARABIAN

In most Arab countries, incense is burned in the form of scented chips or blocks called bakhoor (Arabic: بخور‎ [bɑˈxuːɾ, bʊ-]. Incense is used on special occasions like weddings or on Fridays or generally to perfume the house. The bakhoor is usually burned in a mabkhara, a traditional incense burner (censer) similar to the Somali Dabqaad. It is customary in many Arab countries to pass bakhoor among the guests in the majlis ('congregation'). This is done as a gesture of hospitality.

 

CHINESE

For over two thousand years, the Chinese have used incense in religious ceremonies, ancestor veneration, Traditional Chinese medicine, and daily life. Agarwood (chénxiāng) and sandalwood (tánxiāng) are the two most important ingredients in Chinese incense.

 

Along with the introduction of Buddhism in China came calibrated incense sticks and incense clocks. The first known record is by poet Yu Jianwu (487-551): "By burning incense we know the o'clock of the night, With graduated candles we confirm the tally of the watches." The use of these incense timekeeping devices spread from Buddhist monasteries into Chinese secular society.

Incense-stick burning is an everyday practice in traditional Chinese religion. There are many different types of stick used for different purposes or on different festive days. Many of them are long and thin. Sticks are mostly coloured yellow, red, or more rarely, black. Thick sticks are used for special ceremonies, such as funerals. Spiral incense, with exceedingly long burn times, is often hung from temple ceilings. In some states, such as Taiwan,

 

Singapore, or Malaysia, where they celebrate the Ghost Festival, large, pillar-like dragon incense sticks are sometimes used. These generate so much smoke and heat that they are only burned outside.

 

Chinese incense sticks for use in popular religion are generally odorless or only use the slightest trace of jasmine or rose, since it is the smoke, not the scent, which is important in conveying the prayers of the faithful to heaven. They are composed of the dried powdered bark of a non-scented species of cinnamon native to Cambodia, Cinnamomum cambodianum. Inexpensive packs of 300 are often found for sale in Chinese supermarkets. Though they contain no sandalwood, they often include the Chinese character for sandalwood on the label, as a generic term for incense.

 

Highly scented Chinese incense sticks are used by some Buddhists. These are often quite expensive due to the use of large amounts of sandalwood, agarwood, or floral scents used. The sandalwood used in Chinese incenses does not come from India, its native home, but rather from groves planted within Chinese territory. Sites belonging to Tzu Chi, Chung Tai Shan, Dharma Drum Mountain, Xingtian Temple, or City of Ten Thousand Buddhas do not use incense.

 

INDIAN

Incense sticks, also known as agarbathi (or agarbatti) and joss sticks, in which an incense paste is rolled or moulded around a bamboo stick, are the main forms of incense in India. The bamboo method originated in India, and is distinct from the Nepali/Tibetan and Japanese methods of stick making without bamboo cores. Though the method is also used in the west, it is strongly associated with India.

 

The basic ingredients are the bamboo stick, the paste (generally made of charcoal dust and joss/jiggit/gum/tabu powder – an adhesive made from the bark of litsea glutinosa and other trees), and the perfume ingredients - which would be a masala (spice mix) powder of ground ingredients into which the stick would be rolled, or a perfume liquid sometimes consisting of synthetic ingredients into which the stick would be dipped. Perfume is sometimes sprayed on the coated sticks. Stick machines are sometimes used, which coat the stick with paste and perfume, though the bulk of production is done by hand rolling at home. There are about 5,000 incense companies in India that take raw unperfumed sticks hand-rolled by approximately 200,000 women working part-time at home, and then apply their own brand of perfume, and package the sticks for sale. An experienced home-worker can produce 4,000 raw sticks a day. There are about 50 large companies that together account for up to 30% of the market, and around 500 of the companies, including a significant number of the main ones, including Moksh Agarbatti and Cycle Pure, are based in Mysore.

 

JEWISH TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM

KETORET

Ketoret was the incense offered in the Temple in Jerusalem and is stated in the Book of Exodus to be a mixture of stacte, onycha, galbanum and frankincense.

 

TIBETAN

Tibetan incense refers to a common style of incense found in Tibet, Nepal, and Bhutan. These incenses have a characteristic "earthy" scent to them. Ingredients vary from cinnamon, clove, and juniper, to kusum flower, ashvagandha, and sahi jeera.

 

Many Tibetan incenses are thought to have medicinal properties. Their recipes come from ancient Vedic texts that are based on even older Ayurvedic medical texts. The recipes have remained unchanged for centuries.

 

JAPANESE

In Japan incense appreciation folklore includes art, culture, history, and ceremony. It can be compared to and has some of the same qualities as music, art, or literature. Incense burning may occasionally take place within the tea ceremony, just like calligraphy, ikebana, and scroll arrangement. The art of incense appreciation, or koh-do, is generally practiced as a separate art form from the tea ceremony, and usually within a tea room of traditional Zen design.

 

Agarwood (沈香 Jinkō) and sandalwood (白檀 byakudan) are the two most important ingredients in Japanese incense. Agarwood is known as "jinkō" in Japan, which translates as "incense that sinks in water", due to the weight of the resin in the wood. Sandalwood is one of the most calming incense ingredients and lends itself well to meditation. It is also used in the Japanese tea ceremony. The most valued Sandalwood comes from Mysore in the state of Karnataka in India.

 

Another important ingredient in Japanese incense is kyara (伽羅). Kyara is one kind of agarwood (Japanese incense companies divide agarwood into 6 categories depending on the region obtained and properties of the agarwood). Kyara is currently worth more than its weight in gold.

 

Some terms used in Japanese incense culture include:

 

Incense arts: [香道, kodo]

Agarwood: [ 沈香 ] – from heartwood from Aquilaria trees, unique, the incense wood most used in incense ceremony, other names are: lignum aloes or aloeswood, gaharu, jinko, or oud.

Censer/Incense burner: [香爐] – usually small and used for heating incense not burning, or larger and used for burning

Charcoal: [木炭] – only the odorless kind is used.

Incense woods: [ 香木 ] – a naturally fragrant resinous wood.

 

USAGE

PRACTICAL

Incense fragrances can be of such great strength that they obscure other less desirable odours. This utility led to the use of incense in funerary ceremonies because the incense could smother the scent of decay. An example, as well as of religious use, is the giant Botafumeiro thurible that swings from the ceiling of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. It is used in part to mask the scent of the many tired, unwashed pilgrims huddled together in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.

 

A similar utilitarian use of incense can be found in the post-Reformation Church of England. Although the ceremonial use of incense was abandoned until the Oxford Movement, it was common to have incense (typically frankincense) burned before grand occasions, when the church would be crowded. The frankincense was carried about by a member of the vestry before the service in a vessel called a 'perfuming pan'. In iconography of the day, this vessel is shown to be elongated and flat, with a single long handle on one side. The perfuming pan was used instead of the thurible, as the latter would have likely offended the Protestant sensibilities of the 17th and 18th centuries.

 

The regular burning of direct-burning incense has been used for chronological measurement in incense clocks. These devices can range from a simple trail of incense material calibrated to burn in a specific time period, to elaborate and ornate instruments with bells or gongs, designed to involve multiple senses.

 

Incense made from materials such as citronella can repel mosquitoes and other irritating, distracting, or pestilential insects. This use has been deployed in concert with religious uses by Zen Buddhists who claim that the incense that is part of their meditative practice is designed to keep bothersome insects from distracting the practitioner. Currently, more effective pyrethroid-based mosquito repellent incense is widely available in Asia.

 

Papier d'Arménie was originally sold as a disinfectant as well as for the fragrance.

 

Incense is also used often by people who smoke indoors and do not want the smell to linger.

 

AESTHETIC

Many people burn incense to appreciate its smell, without assigning any other specific significance to it, in the same way that the foregoing items can be produced or consumed solely for the contemplation or enjoyment of the aroma. An example is the kōdō (香道), where (frequently costly) raw incense materials such as agarwood are appreciated in a formal setting.

 

RELIGIOUS

Religious use of incense is prevalent in many cultures and may have roots in the practical and aesthetic uses, considering that many of these religions have little else in common. One common motif is incense as a form of sacrificial offering to a deity. Such use was common in Judaic worship and remains in use for example in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican churches, Taoist and Buddhist Chinese jingxiang (敬香 "offer incense), etc.

 

Aphrodisiac Incense has been used as an aphrodisiac in some cultures. Both ancient Greek and ancient Egyptian mythology suggest the usage of incense by goddesses and nymphs. Incense is thought to heighten sexual desires and sexual attraction.

 

Time-keeper Incense clocks are used to time social, medical and religious practices in parts of eastern Asia. They are primarily used in Buddhism as a timer of mediation and prayer. Different types of incense burn at different rates; therefore, different incense are used for different practices. The duration of burning ranges from minutes to months.

 

Healing stone cleanser Incense is claimed to cleanse and restore energy in healing stones. The technique used is called “smudging” and is done by holding a healing stone over the smoke of burning incense for 20 to 30 seconds. Some people believe that this process not only restores energy but eliminates negative energy.

 

HEALTH RISK FROM INCENSE SMOKE

Incense smoke contains various contaminants including gaseous pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and adsorbed toxic pollutants (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxic metals). The solid particles range between ~10 and 500 nm. In a comparison, Indian sandalwood was found to have the highest emission rate, followed by Japanese aloeswood, then Taiwanese aloeswood, while Chinese smokeless sandalwood had the least.

 

Research carried out in Taiwan in 2001 linked the burning of incense sticks to the slow accumulation of potential carcinogens in a poorly ventilated environment by measuring the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (including benzopyrene) within Buddhist temples. The study found gaseous aliphatic aldehydes, which are carcinogenic and mutagenic, in incense smoke.

 

A survey of risk factors for lung cancer, also conducted in Taiwan, noted an inverse association between incense burning and adenocarcinoma of the lung, though the finding was not deemed significant.

 

In contrast, epidemiologists at the Hong Kong Anti-Cancer Society, Aichi Cancer Center in Nagoya, and several other centers found: "No association was found between exposure to incense burning and respiratory symptoms like chronic cough, chronic sputum, chronic bronchitis, runny nose, wheezing, asthma, allergic rhinitis, or pneumonia among the three populations studied: i.e. primary school children, their non-smoking mothers, or a group of older non-smoking female controls. Incense burning did not affect lung cancer risk among non-smokers, but it significantly reduced risk among smokers, even after adjusting for lifetime smoking amount." However, the researchers qualified their findings by noting that incense burning in the studied population was associated with certain low-cancer-risk dietary habits, and concluded that "diet can be a significant confounder of epidemiological studies on air pollution and respiratory health."

 

Although several studies have not shown a link between incense and lung cancer, many other types of cancer have been directly linked to burning incense. A study published in 2008 in the medical journal Cancer found that incense use is associated with a statistically significant higher risk of cancers of the upper respiratory tract, with the exception of nasopharyngeal cancer. Those who used incense heavily also were 80% more likely to develop squamous-cell carcinomas. The link between incense use and increased cancer risk held when the researchers weighed other factors, including cigarette smoking, diet and drinking habits. The research team noted that "This association is consistent with a large number of studies identifying carcinogens in incense smoke, and given the widespread and sometimes involuntary exposure to smoke from burning incense, these findings carry significant public health implications."

 

In 2015, the South China University of Technology found toxicity of incense to Chinese hamsters' ovarian cells to be even higher than cigarettes.

 

Incensole acetate, a component of Frankincense, has been shown to have anxiolytic-like and antidepressive-like effects in mice, mediated by activation of poorly-understood TRPV3 ion channels in the brain.

 

WIKIPEDIA

Domino's Pizza Inc. are perfectly capable of making rather good pizzas, though I much prefer to make my own. However, look no further than above for a perfect illustration of how so many major companies lack any social responsibility. For decades, people, schools and health agencies have tried, tried and tried again to promote healthier eating habits to both consumers and the food industry. For example, common dietary advice to control Type 2 Diabetes (which is becoming ever more of an issue in the modern world and affecting younger and younger people) is to eat a lot more fresh fruit and vegetables, at least two portions of oily fish a week, and eat a lot less saturated fat, salt and sugars.

 

So what do Domino's promote as soon as the summer school holidays start? Lotta-Chocca Pizza. Frankly it beggars belief and Domino's should hang their corporate heads in total shame.

 

And whilst we are on the subject, why on earth fuse pizza with chocolate in the first place? Old school Italians will be turning in their graves. If you want to eat something similar, presumably as a dessert rather than a main course, go for a nice Belgian Chocolate Tart which at least might have real chocolate in it rather than that foul-looking slurry served up by Domino's.

 

wait, there is more......if some plonker seriously wants to spend their life tracking where the f*ck their pizza is, they frankly need to get out more.

+++ 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 Ling-Temco-Vought A-7 Corsair II was a carrier-capable subsonic light attack aircraft introduced to replace the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk. The A-7 airframe design was based on the successful supersonic Vought F-8 Crusader, although it was somewhat smaller and rounded off. The Corsair II initially entered service with the United States Navy during the Vietnam War. It was later adopted by the United States Air Force, including the Air National Guard, to replace the Douglas A-1 Skyraider and North American F-100 Super Sabre. The aircraft was also exported to several foreign countries, including Greece, Portugal, Thailand and New Zealand.

 

For the latter operator, the Corsair II was part of a major modernization campaign in the early 1970s. For instance, in 1970 14 McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawks were purchased to replace the Vampire FB5's, which had been the primary light attack aircraft for the RNZAF for years, but the type was hopelessly outdated.

Furthermore New Zealand was also looking for a replacement of its similarly ageing Canberra fleet. These 31 aircraft were also phased out of service in mid 1970, and the A-7 chosen as the RNZAFs new fighter bomber because of its proven all-weather strike capability and advances avionics.

 

The RNZAF bought and operated 22 LTV A-7 Corsair II aircraft primarily in the coastal defense/anti-ship and sea patrol roles, air interdiction and air defense roles being secondary duties. The RNZAF Corsair II was very similar to the US Navy’s A-7E, even though the machines would only be operated form land bases. Designated A-7N, the machines featured an AN/APN-190 navigational radar with a Doppler groundspeed and drift detector plus an AN/APQ-128 terrain following radar. For the deployment of smart weapons, the machines were outfitted with a Pave Penny laser target acquisition system under the air intake lip, similar to the USAF’s A-7D, and could carry a wide range of weaponry and sensors, including AN/AAR-45 FLIR pods for an improved all-weather performance. Against enemy ships and large ground targets, visually guided smart bombs (AGM-62 and the more modern GBU-8 HOBOS) were bought, as well as AGM-65 Maverick against smaller, high priority targets.

 

Active service lasted between 1975 and 1999, and the A-7Ns were originally allocated between RNZAF 2 and 75 Squadron at Ohakea, where they were operated together with A-4K and TA-4K. The latter were also emplyed for A-7N pilot conversion training, since the RNZAF did not operate any Corsair II two seaters.

Several times the Squadron deployed to Clark Air Base in the Philippines and to Hawaii with both of the Corsair IIs and Skyhawks to exercise with the United States Air Force. Furthermore, the annual deployments as part of the Five Power Defence Agreement (called Exercise Vanguard) had the Squadron visit Australia, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand to practice with those countries. Two RNZAF A-7s of 75 Squadron even made visits to Great Britain.

 

In the early Nineties the Corsair IIs started to suffer from numerous maintenance and logistic problems due to the lack of spare parts and general financial problems. This also prevented a major avionics update and the procurement of AGM-84 Harpoon missiles for the A-7Ns and the RNZAF P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft. The maintenance situation became so dire that several aircraft were cannibalized for spare parts to service other fighters. In 1992 only sixteen A-7Ns remained operational. This resulted in the available fighters no longer being assigned and dedicated to one specific squadron, but shared and assigned to one of the RNZAF combat squadrons (2, 14 and 75 Squadron, respectively), as needed.

 

During its 24 years of duty in the RNZAF, the A-7 fleet suffered 8 severe accidents with aircraft losses (and two pilots being killed). Nevertheless, the introduction of the A-7 was seen as a success due to the evolution that it allowed the Air Force in aircraft maintenance, with focus in modern computer and electronic systems, and in the steady qualification of pilots and technicians.

 

In 1999, the National Government selected an order of 28 F-16A/B Fighting Falcon aircraft to replace the complete fleet of A-4 Skyhawks and A-7 Corsair IIs, but this procurement plan was cancelled in 2001 following election by the incoming Labour Government under Helen Clark. This was followed by the disbanding of several fixed wing aircraft squadrons, with the consequence of removing the RNZAF's air combat capability. The last A-7 flight in RNZAF service took place on 1st of October 2001. Subsequently, most of the RNZAF's fighter pilots left New Zealand to serve in the Royal Australian Air Force and the Royal Air Force.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 46 ft 2 in (14.06 m)

Wingspan: 38 ft 9 in (11.8 m), 23 ft 9 in (7.24 m) wings folded

Height: 16 ft 1 in (4.9 m)

Wing area: 374.9 sq ft (34.83 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 65A007 root and tip

Empty weight: 19,127 lb (8,676 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 41,998 lb (19,050 kg) overload condition.

Fuel capacity: 1,338 US gal (5,060 l; 1,114 imp gal) (10,200 lb (4,600 kg)) internal

 

Powerplant:

1 × Allison TF41-A-2 non-afterburning turbofan engine, 15,000 lbf (66.7 kN) thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 600 kn (690 mph; 1,111 km/h) at Sea level

Range: 1,070 nmi; 1,231 mi (1,981 km) maximum internal fuel

Ferry range: 1,342 nmi; 1,544 mi (2,485 km) with maximum internal and external fuel

Service ceiling: 42,000 ft (13,000 m)

Wing loading: 77.4 lb/sq ft (378 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.50

Take-off run: 1,705 ft (519.7 m) at 42,000 lb (19,000 kg)

 

Armament:

1× M61A1 Vulcan 20 mm (0.787 in) rotary cannon with 1,030 rounds

6× under-wing and 2× fuselage pylon stations (for mounting AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs only)

with a total ordnance capacity of 15,000 lb (6,803.9 kg)

  

The kit and its assembly:

An idea that had been lingering on my project list for some years, and a recent build of an RNZAF A-7 by fellow modeler KiwiZac at whatifmodelers.com eventually triggered this build, a rather simple alternative livery whif. I had this idea on the agenda for some time, though, already written up a background story (which was accidently deleted early last year and sent the project into hiatus - until now) and had the kit as well as decals collected and stashed away.

 

The basis is the Hobby Boss A-7, which is available in a wide range of variant in 1:72 scale. Not cheap, but IMHO the best Corsair II kit at the moment, because it is full of ample surface details, goes together nicely and features a complete air intake, a good cockpit tub and even some maintenance covers that can be displayed in open position, in case you want to integrate the kit in a diorama. In my case it’s the A-7E kit, because I wanted a late variant and the US Navy’s refueling probe instead of the A-7D’s dorsal adapter for the USAF refueling boom system.

 

For the fictional RNZAF A-7N no fundamental changes were made. I just deliberately used OOB parts like the A-7D’s Pave Penny laser targeting pod under the air intake. As a personal addition I lowered the flaps slightly for a more lively look. Around the hull, some blade antennae were changed or added, and I installed the pair of pitots in front of the windscreen (made from thin wire).

 

The FLIR pod came with the kit, as well as the drop tank under the inner starboards wing pylon and the AIM-9Bs. Only the GBU-8s were externally sourced, from one of the Hasegawa USAF ordnance sets.

 

For the finalized kit on display I mounted the maintenance covers in open position, but for the beauty pics they were provisionally placed in closed position onto the kit’s flanks. The covers had to be modified for this stunt, but since their fit is very good and tight they easily stayed in place, even for the flight scenes!

 

Painting and markings:

This was the more interesting part – I wanted „something special“ for the fictional RNZAF Corsair II. Upon delivery, the USAF SEA scheme would certainly have been the most appropriate camouflage – the A-4K’s were painted this way and the aforementioned inspiring build by KiwiZac was finished this way.

 

Anyway, my plan had been from the start a machine in late service with low-viz markings similar to the A-4Ks, which received an attractive three-tone wrap-around scheme (in FS 34102, 34079 and 36081) or a simple all-around coat of FS 34079.

 

Both of these schemes could have been a sensible choice for this project, but… no! Too obvious, too simple for my taste. I rather wanted something that makes you wonder and yet make the aircraft look authentic and RNZAF-esque.

 

While digging for options and alternatives I stumbled upon the RNZAF’s C-130 Hercules transporters, which, like Canadian machines, carry a wrap-around scheme in two tones of grey (a light blue grey and a darker tone with a reddish hue) and a deep olive green tone that comes close to Dark Slate Grey, together with low-viz markings. A pretty unique scheme! Not as murky as the late A-4Ks and IMHO also well suited for the naval/coastal environment that the machine would patrol.

 

I was not able to positively identify the original tones on the CAF and RNZAF Hercs, so I interpreted various aircraft pictures. I settled upon Humbrol 163 (RAF Dark Green) 125 (FS 36118, Gunship Grey) and Revell 57 (RAL 7000, similar to FS 35237, but lighter and “colder”). For the wraparound scheme I used the C-130s as benchmark.

 

The cockpit became Dark Gull Grey (Humbrol 140) while the landing gear and the air intake duct became – behind 5mm of grey around the intake lip - white. The maintenance hatches’ interior was painted with a mix of Humbrol 81 and 38, for a striking zinc chromate primer look.

 

After a light black ink wash the kit received some panel post-shading for more contrast esp. between the dark colors and a slightly worn and sun-bleached look, since the aircraft would be depicted towards the end of its active service life.

 

Decals were the most challenging task, though: finding suitable RNZAF roundels is not easy, and I was happy when Xtradecal released an appropriate sheet that offers kiwi roundels for all positions (since motifs for port and starboard have to be mirrored). The Kiwi squadron emblem actually belongs to an RNZAF A-4K (from an Old Models sheet). The serial codes were puzzled together from single letter (TL Modellbau), most stencils come from the Hobby Boss OOB sheet.

  

A simple build, yet a very interesting topic and in the end also an IMHO very cool-looking aircraft in its fictional livery. Building the Hobby Boss A-7 was easy, despite some inherent flaws of the kit (e .g. totally blank dashboard and side consoles, and even no decals included!). The paint scheme lent from the RNZAF Hercs suits the SLUF well, though.

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The basic VF-1 was built and deployed in four minor variants (designated A, J, and S single-seater and the D two-seater/trainer) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie exoskeleton with enhanced protection and integrated missile launchers, the so-called FAST (“Fuel And Sensor Tray”) packs that created the fully space-capable "Super" Valkyries and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Super Valkyrie”.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several original variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), even though these machines were frequently updated and modified during their career, leading to a wide range of sub-variants and different standards.

 

Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design. One of these post-war designs became the VF-1EX, a replica variant of the VF-1J with up-to-date avionics and instrumentation. It was only built in small numbers in the late 2040s and was a dedicated variant for advanced training with dissimilar mock aerial and ground fighting.

 

The only operator of this type was Xaos (sometimes spelled as Chaos), a private and independent military and civilian contractor. Xaos was originally a fold navigation business that began venturing into fold wave communication and information, expanding rapidly during the 2050s and entering new business fields like flight tests and providing aggressor aircraft for military training. They were almost entirely independent from the New United Nations Spacy (NUNS) and was led by the mysterious Lady M. During the Vár Syndrome outbreak, Echo Squadron and Delta Flight and the tactical sound unit Thrones and Walküre were formed to counteract its effects in the Brísingr Globular Cluster.

 

The VF-1EX was restricted to its primary objective and never saw real combat. The replica unit retained the overall basic performance of the original VF-1 Valkyrie, the specifications being more than sufficient for training and mock combat. The only difference was the addition of the contemporary military EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system for the pilot as an emergency standard, an exoskeleton unit with personal inner-wear, two variable geometry wings, two hybrid jet/rocket engines, mechanical hardware for the head, torso, arms and legs. This feature gave the VF-1EX its new designation.

Furthermore, the VF-1EX was also outfitted with other electronic contingency functions like AI-assisted flight and remote override controls. Some of these features could be disabled according to necessity or pilot preferences. The gun pod unit was retained but was usually only loaded with paintball rounds for mock combat. For the same purpose, one of the original Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head unit" was replaced by a long-range laser target designator. AMM-1 missiles with dummy warheads or other training ordnance could be added to the wing hardpoints, but the VF-1EX was never seen being equipped this way - it remained an agile dogfighter.

  

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid. 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system.

 

Accommodation:

Single pilot in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

 

Dimensions:

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard take-off mass: 18.5 metric tons

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2);

4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard TOW 2.49; maximum TOW 1.24

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

1x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head" unit, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm

4x underwing hardpoints for a wide variety of ordnance

  

The kit and its assembly:

The VF-1EX Valkyrie is a Variable Fighter introduced in the Macross Δ television series, and it's, as described above, a replica training variant that resembles outwardly the VF-1J. There's even a Hasegawa 1:72 kit from 2016 of this obscure variant.

However, what I tried to recreate is a virtual (and purely fictional/non-canonical) VF-1EX, re-skinned by someone called David L. on the basis of a virtual VF-1S 3D model with a 2 m wing span (sounds like ~1:8 scale) for the Phoenix R/C simulator software. Check this for reference: www.supermotoxl.com/projects-articles/ready-to-drive-fly-...). How bizarre can things be/become? And how sick is a hardware model of it, though...?

 

I found the complex livery very attractive and had the plan to build a 1:100 model for some years now. But it took this long to gather enough mojo to tackle this project, due to the tricolor paint scheme's complex nature...

The "canvas" for this stunt is a vintage Arii 1:100 VF-1 kit, built OOB except for some standard mods. The kit was actually a VF-1A, but I had a spare VF-1J head unit in store as a suitable replacement. Externally, some dorsal blade aerials and vanes on the nose were added, the attachment points under the wings for the pylons were PSRed away. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit because this model would be displayed in flight. As a consequence, the ventral gun pod received an adapter at its tail and I added one of my home-brew wire displays, created on the basis of the kit's OOB plastic base.

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, this VF-1 is based on a re-skinned virtual R/C model, and its creator apparently took inspiration from a canonical VF fighter, namely a VF-31C "Siegfried", and specifically the "Mirage Farina Jenius Custom" version from the Macross Δ series that plays around 2051. Screenshots from the demo flight video under the link above provided various perspectives as painting reference, but the actual implementation on the tiny model caused serious headaches.

The VF-1's shapes are rather round and curvy, the model's jagged surface and small size prohibited masking. The kit is IMHO also best built and painted in single sub-assemblies, but upon closer inspection the screenshots revealed some marking inconsistencies (apparently edited from various videos?), and certain areas were left uncertain, e .g. the inside of the legs or the whole belly area. Therefore, this model is just a personal interpretation of the design, and as such I also deviated in the markings.

 

The paints became Humbrol 20 (Crimson) and 58 (Magenta), plus Revell 301 (Semi-gloss White), and they were applied with brushes. To replicate the edgy and rather fragmented pattern I initially laid down the two reds in a rather rough and thin fashion and painted the white dorsal and ventral areas. Once thoroughly dry, the white edges were quasi-masked with white decal material, either with stripes of various widths or tailored from sheet material, e. g. for the "wedges" on the wings and fins and the dorsal "swallow tail". This went more smoothly than expected, with a very convincing and clean result that i'd never had achieved with brushes alone, even with masking attempts, which would probably have led to chaos and too much paint on the model.

 

Other details like the grey leading edges or the air intakes were created with grey and black decal material, too.

No weathering was done, since the aircraft would be clean and in pristine condition, but I used a soft pencil to emphasize the engraved panel lines, esp. on white background. The gun pod became grey and the exhausts, painted in Revell 91 (Iron), were treated with graphite for a darker shade and a more metallic look.

 

Stencils came from the kit's OOB sheet, but only a few, since there was already a lot "going on" on the VF-1's hull. The flash-shaped Xaos insignia and the NUNS markings on legs and wings were printed at home - as well as the small black vernier thrusters all around the hull, for a uniform look. The USN style Modex and the small letter code on the fins came from an Colorado Decals F-5 sheet, for an aggressor aircraft.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed overall with semi-gloss acrlyic varnish (which turned out glossier than expected...) and position lights etc. added with translucent paint on top of a silver base.

  

Well, while the VF-1 was built OOB with no major mods and just some cosmetical upgrades, the paint scheme and its finish were more demanding - and I am happy that the "decal masking" trick worked so fine. The paint scheme surely is attractive, even though it IMHO does not really takes the VF-1's lines into account. Nevertheless, I am certain that there are not many models that are actually based on a virtual 1:8 scale 3D model of an iconic SF fighter, so that this VF-1EX might be unique.

 

Drone aerial view of the NATO Smart Energy Training and Assessment Camp (SETAC), at Ziemsko Airfield at the Drawsko Pomorskie training area in Poland. The SETAC concept is deployed as part of the multinational Exercise Capable Logistician 2019, a regular exercise for NATO and Partner nations to test interoperability and assess NATO standards.

 

Photo: ITALIAN AIRFORCE

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

  

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 10.23 m (33 ft 6¼ in)

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

Height: 3.95 m (12 ft 11¼ in)

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

 

Performance

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

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

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

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

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

 

Armament:

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly

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

 

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

 

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

 

What was thrown into the mix:

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

• Horizontal stabilizers from an Airfix P-51 Mustang

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

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

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

• The canopy comes from a Hobby Boss F4U Corsair

• Ordnance hardpoints were cut from styrene strips

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

Painting and markings

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

 

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

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

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

• Humbrol 114 (Russian Green, out of production)

 

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

 

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

  

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

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Supermarine Seafire was a naval version of the Supermarine Spitfire adapted for operation from aircraft carriers. It was analogous in concept to the Hawker Sea Hurricane, a navalized version of the Spitfire's stablemate, the Hawker Hurricane. The name Seafire was derived from the abbreviation of the longer name Sea Spitfire.

 

The idea of adopting a navalized, carrier-capable version of the Supermarine Spitfire had been mooted by the Admiralty as early as May 1938. Despite a pressing need to replace various types of obsolete aircraft that were still in operation with the Fleet Air Arm (FAA), some opposed the notion, such as Winston Churchill, although these disputes were often a result of an overriding priority being placed on maximizing production of land-based Spitfires instead. During 1941 and early 1942, the concept was again pushed for by the Admiralty, culminating in an initial batch of Seafire Mk Ib fighters being provided in late 1941, which were mainly used for pilots to gain experience operating the type at sea. While there were concerns over the low strength of its undercarriage, which had not been strengthened like many naval aircraft would have been, its performance was found to be acceptable.

 

From 1942 onwards, further Seafire models were quickly ordered, including the first operationally-viable Seafire F Mk III variant. This led to the type rapidly spreading throughout the FAA. In November 1942, the first combat use of the Seafire occurred during Operation Torch, the Allied landings in North Africa. In July 1943, the Seafire was used to provide air cover for the Allied invasion of Sicily; and reprised this role in September 1943 during the subsequent Allied invasion of Italy. During 1944, the type was again used in quantity to provide aerial support to Allied ground forces during the Normandy landings and Operation Dragoon in Southern France. During the latter half of 1944, the Seafire became a part of the aerial component of the British Pacific Fleet, where it quickly proved to be a capable interceptor against the feared kamikaze attacks by Japanese pilots which had become increasingly common during the final years of the Pacific War. Several Seafire variants were produced during WWII, more or less mirroring the development of its land-based ancestor.

 

The Seafire continued to be used for some time after the end of the war, and new, dedicated versions were developed and exported. The FAA opted to promptly withdraw all of its Merlin-powered Seafires and replace them with Griffon-powered counterparts. The type saw further active combat use during the Korean War, in which FAA Seafires performed hundreds of missions in the ground attack and combat air patrol roles against North Korean forces during 1950. The Seafire was withdrawn from FAA service during the 1950s and was replaced by the newer Hawker Sea Fury, the last piston engine fighter to be used by the service, along with the first generation of jet-propelled naval fighters, such as the de Havilland Vampire, Supermarine Attacker, and Hawker Sea Hawk.

 

After WWII, the Royal Canadian Navy and French Aviation Navale also obtained Seafires to operate from ex-Royal Navy aircraft carriers. France received a total of 140 Seafires of various versions from 1946 on, including 114 Seafire Mk IIIs in two tranches (35 of them were set aside for spare part) until 1948, and these were followed in 1949 by fifteen Mk. 15 fighters and twelve FR Mk. 23 armed photo reconnaissance aircraft. Additionally, twenty land-based Mk. IXs were delivered to Naval Air Station Cuers-Pierrefeu as trainers.

 

The Seafire Mk. 23 was a dedicated post-war export version. It combined several old and new features and was the final “new” Spitfire variant to be powered by a Merlin engine, namely a Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M with 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) that drove a four-blade propeller. The Mk. 23 was originally built as a fighter (as Seafire F Mk. 23), but most machines were delivered or later converted with provisions for being fitted with two F24 cameras in the rear fuselage and received the service designation FR Mk. 23 (or just FR.23). Only 32 of this interim post-war version were built by Cunliffe-Owen, and all of them were sold to foreign customers.

 

Like the Seafire 17, the 23 had a cut-down rear fuselage and teardrop canopy, which afforded a better all-round field of view than the original cockpit. The windscreen was modified, too, to a rounded section, with narrow quarter windows, rather than the flat windscreen used on land-based Spitfires. As a novel feature the Seafire 23 featured a "sting" arrestor hook instead of the previous V-shaped ventral arrangement.

The fuel capacity was 120 gal (545 l) distributed in two main forward fuselage tanks: the lower tank carried 48 gal (218 l) while the upper tank carried 36 gal (163 l), plus two fuel tanks built into the leading edges of the wings with capacities of 12.5 (57 l) and 5.5 gal (25 l) respectively. It featured a reinforced main undercarriage with longer oleos and a lower rebound ratio, a measure to tame the deck behavior of the Mk. 15 and reducing the propensity of the propeller tips "pecking" the deck during an arrested landing. The softer oleos also stopped the aircraft from occasionally bouncing over the arrestor wires and into the crash barrier.

The wings were taken over from the contemporary Spitfire 21 and therefore not foldable. However, this saved weight and complexity, and the Seafire’s compact dimensions made this flaw acceptable for its operators. The wings were furthermore reinforced, with a stronger main spar necessitated by the new undercarriage, and as a bonus they were able to carry heavier underwing loads than previous Seafire variants. This made the type not only suitable for classic dogfighting (basic armament consisted of four short-barreled 20 mm Hispano V cannon in the outer wings), but also for attack missions with bombs and unguided rockets.

 

The Seafire’s Aéronavale service was quite short, even though they saw hot battle duty. 24 Mk. IIIs were deployed on the carrier Arromanches in 1948 when it sailed for Vietnam to fight in the First Indochina War. The French Seafires operated from land bases and from Arromanches on ground attack missions against the Viet Minh before being withdrawn from combat operations in January 1949.

After returning to European waters, the Aéronavale’s Seafire frontline units were re-equipped with the more modern and capable Seafire 15s and FR 23s, but these were also quickly replaced by Grumman F6F Hellcats from American surplus stock, starting already in 1950. The fighters were retired from carrier operations and soon relegated to training and liaison duties, and eventually scrapped. However, the FR.23s were at this time the only carrier-capable photo reconnaissance aircraft in the Aéronavale’s ranks, so that these machines remained active with Flottille 1.F until 1955, but their career was rather short, too, and immediately ended when the first naval jets became available and raised the performance bar.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 31 ft 10 in (9.70 m)

Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)

Height: 12 ft 9 in (3.89 m) tail down with propeller blade vertical

Wing area: 242.1 ft² (22.5 m²)

Empty weight: 5,564 lb (2,524 kg)

Gross weight: 7,415 lb (3,363 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine,

delivering 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) at 11,000 ft and driving a 4-bladed constant-speed propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 404 mph (650 km/h) at 21,000 ft (6,400 m)

Cruise speed: 272 mph (438 km/h, 236 kn)

Range: 493 mi (793 km) on internal fuel at cruising speed

965 mi (1,553 km) with 90 gal drop tank

Service ceiling: 42,500 ft (12,954 m)

Rate of climb: 4,745 ft/min (24.1 m/s) at 10,000 ft (3,048 m)

Time to altitude: 20,000 ft (6,096 m) in 8 minutes 6 seconds

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm Hispano V cannon; 175 rpg inboard, 150 rpg outboard

Hardpoints for up to 2× 250 lb (110 kg) bombs (outer wings), plus 1× 500 lb (230 kg) bomb

(ventral hardpoint) or drop tanks, or up to 8× "60 lb" RP-3 rockets on zero-length launchers

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was another attempt to reduce The Stash. The basis was a Special Hobby FR Mk. 47, which I had originally bought as a donor kit: the engine housing bulges of its Griffon engine were transplanted onto a racing P-51D Mustang. Most of the kit was still there, and from this basis I decided to create a fictional post-WWII Seafire/Spitfire variant.

 

With the Griffon fairings gone a Merlin engine was settled, and the rest developed spontaneously. The propeller was improvised, with a P-51D spinner (Academy kit) and blades from the OOB 5-blade propeller, which are slightly deeper than the blades from the Spitfire Mk. IX/XVI prop. In order to attach it to the hull and keep it movable, I implanted my standard metal axis/styrene tube arrangement.

 

With the smaller Merlin engine, I used the original, smaller Spitfire stabilizers but had to use the big, late rudder, due to the taller fin of the post-ware Spit-/Seafire models. The four-spoke wheels also belong to an earlier Seafire variant. Since it was an option in the kit, I went for a fuselage with camera openings (the kit comes with two alternative fuselages as well as a vast range of optional parts for probably ANY late Spit- and Seafire variant – and also for many fictional hybrids!), resulting in a low spine and a bubble canopy, what gives the aircraft IMHO very sleek and elegant lines. In order to maintain this impression I also used the short cannon barrels from the kit. For extended range on recce missions I furthermore gave the model the exotic underwing slipper tanks instead of the optional missile launch rail stubs under the outer wing sections. Another mod is the re-installment of the small oil cooler under the left wing root from a Spitfire Mk. V instead of the symmetrical standard radiator pair – just another subtle sign that “something’s not right” here.

  

Painting and markings:

The decision to build this model as a French aircraft was inspired by a Caracal Decals set with an Aéronavale Seafire III from the Vietnam tour of duty in 1948, an aircraft with interesting roundels that still carried British FAA WWII colors (Dark Slate Grey/Dark Sea Grey, Sky). Later liveries of the type remain a little obscure, though, and information about them is contradictive. Some profiles show French Seafires in British colors, with uniform (Extra) Dark Sea Grey upper and Sky lower surfaces, combined with a high waterline – much like contemporary FAA aircraft like the Sea Fury. However, I am a bit in doubt concerning the Sky, because French naval aircraft of that era, esp. recce types like the Shorts Sunderland or PBY Catalina, were rather painted in white or very light grey, just with uniform dark grey upper surfaces, reminding of British Coastal Command WWII aircraft.

 

Since this model would be a whif, anyway, and for a pretty look, I adopted the latter design, backed by an undated profile of a contemporary Seafire Mk. XV from Flottille S.54, a training unit, probably from the Fifties - not any valid guarantee for authenticity, but it looks good, if not elegant!

Another option from that era would have been an all-blue USN style livery, which should look great on a Spitfire, too. But I wanted something more elegant and odd, underpinning the bubbletop Seafire’s clean lines.

 

I settled for Extra Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 123) and Light Grey (FS. 36495, Humbrol 147) as basic tones, with a very high waterline. The spinner was painted yellow, the only colorful marking. Being a post-war aircraft of British origin, the cockpit interior was painted in black (Revell 09, anthracite). The landing gear wells became RAF Cockpit Green (Humbrol 78), while the inside of the respective covers became Sky (Humbrol 90) – reflecting the RAF/FAA’s post-war practice of applying the external camouflage paint on these surfaces on Spit-/Seafires, too. On this specific aircraft the model displays, just the exterior had been painted over by the new operator. Looks weird, but it’s a nice detail.

 

The roundels came from the aforementioned 1948 Seafire Mk. III, and their odd design – esp. the large ones on the wings, and only the fuselage roundels carry the Aéronavale’s anchor icon and a yellow border – creates a slightly confusing look. Unfortunately, the roundels were not 100% opaque, this became only apparent after their application, and they did not adhere well, either.

The tactical code had to be improvised with single, black letters of various sizes – they come from a Hobby Boss F4F USN pre-WWII Wildcat, but were completely re-arrenged into the French format. The fin flash on the rudder had to be painted, with red and blue paint, in an attempt to match the decals’ tones, and separated by a white decal stripe. The anchor icon on the rudder had to be printed by myself, unfortunately the decal on the bow side partly disintegrated. Stencils were taken from the Special Hobby kit’s OOB sheet.

 

The model received a light black ink washing, post-panel shading with dry-brushing and some soot stains around the exhausts, but not too much weathering, since it would be relatively new. Finally, everything was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A relatively quick and simple build, and the Special Hobby kit went together with little problems – a very nice and versatile offering. The mods are subtle, but I like the slender look of this late Spitfire model, coupled with the elegant Merlin engine – combined into the fictional Mk. 23. The elegant livery just underlines the aircraft’s sleek lines. Not spectacular, but a pretty result.

 

+++ 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 Waffenträger (Weapon Carrier) VTS3 “Diana” was a prototype for a wheeled tank destroyer. It was developed by Thyssen-Henschel (later Rheinmetall) in Kassel, Germany, in the late Seventies, in response to a German Army requirement for a highly mobile tank destroyer with the firepower of the Leopard 1 main battle tank then in service and about to be replaced with the more capable Leopard 2 MBT, but less complex and costly. The main mission of the Diana was light to medium territorial defense, protection of infantry units and other, lighter, elements of the cavalry as well as tactical reconnaissance. Instead of heavy armor it would rather use its good power-to-weight ratio, excellent range and cross-country ability (despite the wheeled design) for defense and a computerized fire control system to accomplish this mission.

 

In order to save development cost and time, the vehicle was heavily based on the Spähpanzer Luchs (Lynx), a new German 8x8 amphibious reconnaissance armored fighting vehicle that had just entered Bundeswehr service in 1975. The all-wheel drive Luchs made was well armored against light weapons, had a full NBC protection system and was characterized by its extremely low-noise running. The eight large low-pressure tires had run-flat properties, and, at speeds up to about 50 km/h, all four axles could be steered, giving the relatively large vehicle a surprising agility and very good off-road performance. As a special feature, the vehicle was equipped with a rear-facing driver with his own driving position (normally the radio operator), so that the vehicle could be driven at full speed into both directions – a heritage from German WWII designs, and a tactical advantage when the vehicle had to quickly retreat from tactical position after having been detected. The original Luchs weighed less than 20 tons, was fully amphibious and could surmount water obstacles quickly and independently using propellers at the rear and the fold back trim vane at the front. Its armament was relatively light, though, a 20 mm Rheinmetall MK 20 Rh 202 gun in the turret that was effective against both ground and air targets.

 

The Waffenträger “Diana” used the Luchs’ hull and dynamic components as basis, and Thyssen-Henschel solved the challenge to mount a large and heavy 105 mm L7 gun with its mount on the light chassis through a minimalistic, unmanned mount and an autoloader. Avoiding a traditional manned and heavy, armored turret, a lot of weight and internal volume that had to be protected could be saved, and crew safety was indirectly improved, too. This concept had concurrently been tested in the form of the VTS1 (“Versuchsträger Scheitellafette #1) experimental tank in 1976 for the Kampfpanzer 3 development, which eventually led to the Leopard 2 MBT (which retained a traditional turret, though).

 

For the “Diana” test vehicle, Thyssen-Henschel developed a new low-profile turret with a very small frontal area. Two crew members, the commander (on the right side) and the gunner (to the left), were seated in/under the gun mount, completely inside of the vehicle’s hull. The turret was a very innovative construction for its time, fully stabilized and mounted the proven 105mm L7 rifled cannon with a smoke discharger. Its autoloader contained 8 rounds in a carousel magazine. 16 more rounds could be carried in the hull, but they had to be manually re-loaded into the magazine, which was only externally accessible. A light, co-axial 7,62mm machine gun against soft targets was available, too, as well as eight defensive smoke grenade mortars.

 

The automated L7 had a rate of fire of ten rounds per minute and could fire four types of ammunition: a kinetic energy penetrator to destroy armored vehicles; a high explosive anti-tank round to destroy thin-skinned vehicles and provide anti-personnel fragmentation; a high explosive plastic round to destroy bunkers, machine gun and sniper positions, and create openings in walls for infantry to access; and a canister shot for use against dismounted infantry in the open or for smoke charges. The rounds to be fired could be pre-selected, so that the gun was able to automatically fire a certain ammunition sequence, but manual round selection was possible at any time, too.

 

In order to take the new turret, the Luchs hull had to be modified. Early calculations had revealed that a simple replacement of the Luchs’ turret with the new L7 mount would have unfavorably shifted the vehicle’s center of gravity up- and forward, making it very nose-heavy and hard to handle in rough terrain or at high speed, and the long barrel would have markedly overhung the front end, impairing handling further. It was also clear that the additional weight and the rise of the CoG made amphibious operations impossible - a fate that met the upgraded Luchs recce tanks in the Eighties, too, after several accidents with overturned vehicles during wading and drowned crews. With this insight the decision was made to omit the vehicle’s amphibious capability, save weight and complexity, and to modify the vehicle’s layout considerably to optimize the weight distribution.

 

Taking advantage of the fact that the Luchs already had two complete driver stations at both ends, a pair of late-production hulls were set aside in 1977 and their internal layout reversed. The engine bay was now in the vehicle’s front, the secured ammunition storage was placed next to it, behind the separate driver compartment, and the combat section with the turret mechanism was located behind it. Since the VTS3s were only prototypes, only minimal adaptations were made. This meant that the driver was now located on the right side of the vehicle, while and the now-rear-facing secondary driver/radio operator station ended up on the left side – much like a RHD vehicle – but this was easily accepted in the light of cost and time savings. As a result, the gun and its long, heavy barrel were now located above the vehicle’s hull, so that the overall weight distribution was almost neutral and overall dimensions remained compact.

 

Both test vehicles were completed in early 1978 and field trials immediately started. While the overall mobility was on par with the Luchs and the Diana’s high speed and low noise profile was highly appreciated, the armament was and remained a source of constant concern. Shooting in motion from the Diana turned out to be very problematic, and even firing from a standstill was troublesome. The gun mount and the vehicle’s complex suspension were able to "hold" the recoil of the full-fledged 105-mm tank gun, which had always been famous for its rather large muzzle energy. But when fired, even in the longitudinal plane, the vehicle body fell heavily towards the stern, so that the target was frequently lost and aiming had to be resumed – effectively negating the benefit from the autoloader’s high rate of fire and exposing the vehicle to potential target retaliation. Firing to the side was even worse. Several attempts were made to mend this flaw, but neither the addition of a muzzle brake, stronger shock absorbers and even hydro-pneumatic suspension elements did not solve the problem. In addition, the high muzzle flames and the resulting significant shockwave required the infantry to stay away from the vehicle intended to support them. The Bundeswehr also criticized the too small ammunition load, as well as the fact that the autoloader magazine could not be re-filled under armor protection, so that the vehicle had to retreat to safe areas to re-arm and/or to adapt to a new mission profile. This inherent flaw not only put the crew under the hazards of enemy fire, it also negated the vehicle’s NBC protection – a serious issue and likely Cold War scenario. Another weak point was the Diana’s weight: even though the net gain of weight compared with the Luchs was less than 3 tons after the conversion, this became another serious problem that led to the Diana’s demise: during trials the Bundeswehr considered the possibility to airlift the Diana, but its weight (even that of the Luchs, BTW) was too much for the Luftwaffe’s biggest own transport aircraft, the C-160 Transall. Even aircraft from other NATO members, e.g. the common C-130 Hercules, could hardly carry the vehicle. In theory, equipment had to be removed, including the cannon and parts of its mount.

 

Since the tactical value of the vehicle was doubtful and other light anti-tank weapons in the form of the HOT anti-tank missile had reached operational status, so that very light vehicles and even small infantry groups could now effectively fight against full-fledged enemy battle tanks from a safe distance, the Diana’s development was stopped in 1988. Both VTS3 prototypes were mothballed, stored at the Bundeswehr Munster Training Area camp and are still waiting to be revamped as historic exhibits alongside other prototypes like the Kampfpanzer 70 in the German Tank Museum located there, too.

  

Specifications:

Crew: 4 (commander, driver, gunner, radio operator/second driver)

Weight: 22.6 t

Length: 7.74 m (25 ft 4 ¼ in)

Width: 2.98 m ( 9 ft 9 in)

Height: XXX

Ground clearance: 440 mm (1 ft 4 in)

Suspension: hydraulic all-wheel drive and steering

 

Armor:

Unknown, but sufficient to withstand 14.5 mm AP rounds

 

Performance:

Speed: 90 km/h (56 mph) on roads

Operational range: 720 km (445 mi)

Power/weight: 13,3 hp/ton with petrol, 17,3 hp/ton with diesel

 

Engine:

1× Daimler Benz OM 403A turbocharged 10-cylinder 4-stroke multi-fuel engine,

delivering 300 hp with petrol, 390 hp with diesel

 

Armament:

1× 105 mm L7 rifled gun with autoloader (8 rounds ready, plus 16 in reserve)

1× co-axial 7.92 mm M3 machine gun with 2.000 rounds

Two groups of four Wegmann 76 mm smoke mortars

  

The kit and its assembly:

I have been a big Luchs fan since I witnessed one in action during a public Bundeswehr demo day when I was around 10 years old: a huge, boxy and futuristic vehicle with strange proportions, gigantic wheels, water propellers, a mind-boggling mobility and all of this utterly silent. Today you’d assume that this vehicle had an electric engine – spooky! So I always had a soft spot for it, and now it was time and a neat occasion to build a what-if model around it.

 

This fictional wheeled tank prototype model was spawned by a leftover Revell 1:72 Luchs kit, which I had bought some time ago primarily for the turret, used in a fictional post-WWII SdKfz. 234 “Puma” conversion. With just the chassis left I wondered what other use or equipment it might take, and, after several weeks with the idea in the back of my mind, I stumbled at Silesian Models over an M1128 resin conversion set for the Trumpeter M1126 “Stryker” 8x8 APC model. From this set as potential donor for a conversion the prototype idea with an unmanned turret was born.

 

Originally I just planned to mount the new turret onto the OOB hull, but when playing with the parts I found the look with an overhanging gun barrel and the bigger turret placed well forward on the hull goofy and unbalanced. I was about to shelf the idea again, until I recognized that the Luchs’ hull is almost symmetrical – the upper hull half could be easily reversed on the chassis tub (at least on the kit…), and this would allow much better proportions. From this conceptual change the build went straightforward, reversing the upper hull only took some minor PSR. The resin turret was taken mostly OOB, it only needed a scratched adapter to fit into the respective hull opening. I just added a co-axial machine gun fairing, antenna bases (from the Luchs kit, since they could, due to the long gun barrel, not be attached to the hull anymore) and smoke grenade mortars (also taken from the Luchs).

 

An unnerving challenge became the Luchs kit’s suspension and drive train – it took two days to assemble the vehicle’s underside alone! While this area is very accurate and delicate, the fact that almost EVERY lever and stabilizer is a separate piece on four(!) axles made the assembly a very slow process. Just for reference: the kit comes with three and a half sprues. A full one for the wheels (each consists of three parts, and more than another one for suspension and drivetrain!

Furthermore, the many hull surface details like tools or handles – these are more than a dozen bits and pieces – are separate, very fragile and small (tiny!), too. Cutting all these wee parts out and cleaning them was a tedious affair, too, plus painting them separately.

Otherwise the model went together well, but it’s certainly not good for quick builders and those with big fingers and/or poor sight.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was a conservative choice; it is a faithful adaptation of the Bundeswehr’s NATO standard camouflage for the European theatre of operations that was introduced in the Eighties. It was adopted by many armies to confuse potential aggressors from the East, so that observers could not easily identify a vehicle and its nationality. It consists of a green base with red-brown and black blotches, in Germany it was executed with RAL tones, namely 6031 (Bronze Green), 8027 (Leather Brown) and 9021 (Tar Black). The pattern was standardized for each vehicle type and I stuck to the official Luchs pattern, trying to adapt it to the new/bigger turret. I used Revell acrylic paints, since the authentic RAL tones are readily available in this product range (namely the tones 06, 65 and 84). The big tires were painted with Revell 09 (Anthracite).

 

Next the model was treated with a highly thinned washing with black and red-brown acrylic paint, before decals were applied, taken from the OOB sheet and without unit markings, since the Diana would represent a test vehicle. After sealing them with a thin coat of clear varnish the model was furthermore treated with lightly dry-brushed Revell 45 and 75 to emphasize edges and surface details, and the separately painted hull equipment was mounted. The following step was a cloudy treatment with watercolors (from a typical school paintbox, it’s great stuff for weathering!), simulating dust residue all over the hull. After a final protective coat with matt acrylic varnish I finally added some mineral artist pigments to the lower hull areas and created mud crusts on the wheels through light wet varnish traces into which pigments were “dusted”.

  

Basically a simple project, but the complex Luchs kit with its zillion of wee bits and pieces took time and cost some nerves. However, the result looks pretty good, and the Stryker turret blends well into the overall package. Not certain how realistic the swap of the Luchs’ internal layout would have been, but I think that the turret moved to the rear makes more sense than the original forward position? After all, the model is supposed to be a prototype, so there’s certainly room for creative freedom. And in classic Bundeswehr colors, the whole thing even looks pretty convincing.

 

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the full-up VF-1 prototype (VF-X-1).

 

The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.

 

The basic VF-1 was built and deployed in four minor variants (designated A, J, and S single-seater and the D two-seater/trainer) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie exoskeleton with enhanced protection and integrated missile launchers, the so-called FAST (“Fuel And Sensor Tray”) packs that created the fully space-capable "Super" Valkyries and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Super Valkyrie”.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

In the course of its career the versatile VF-1 underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 on, placed in a streamlined fairing in front of the cockpit. This system allowed for long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his position with active radar emissions, and it could be used for target illumination and guiding precision weapons. Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with receivers, depending on the systems, mounted on the wingtips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures were also mounted on some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods. Specialized reconnaissance and ECM sub-versions were developed from existing airframes, too.

 

The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68). However, beyond this original production several “re-built” variants existed, too, and remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet, even after 35 years after the type's service introduction!

  

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid, used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force. 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system

 

Accommodation:

Single pilot in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

 

Dimensions:

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard take-off mass: 18.5 metric tons

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2);

4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard TOW 2.49; maximum TOW 1.24

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

1x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head" unit, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min

4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including

12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or

12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or

6x RMS-1 large anti-spaceship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or

4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,

or a combination of above load-outs and other guided and unguided ordnance

  

The kit and its assembly:

After a long time, I found enough mojo to tackle another ARII 1:100 VF-1, but this time in Battroid mode. Unlike the simple Fighter mode kits, ARII’s Battroid kit of the iconic Valkyrie is more demanding and calls for some structural modifications to create a decent and presentable “giant robot” model – OOB, the model remains quite two-dimensional and “stiff”. The much newer WAVE kit in 1:100 scale is certainly a better model of the VF-1, but I love the old ARII kits because of their simplicity.

 

The kit is a “Super Valykrie” model, but it donated its FAST pack extra parts to a space-capable VF-1 Fighter build a long time ago and has been collecting dust in The Stash™ (SF/mecha sub-department at the Western flank) since then. The complete Battroid model was still left, though, even with most of the decals, and when I recently searched for artwork/visual references for another Macross project I came across screenshots from the original TV series of a canonical VF-1 that I had been planning to build for some years, and so I eventually set things in motion.

 

The kit was basically built OOB, but it received some upgrades. More severe surgery would be necessary to create a “good” Battroid model – e. g. creating vertical recesses around the torso – but this is IMHO not worthwhile. These updates included additional joints in the upper arms and legs, created with styrene tubes, as well as a new hip construction made from coated steel wire and styrene tube material that allows a three-dimensional posture of the legs - for a more vivid appearance and more dynamic poses. Other small mods that enhance the overall impression are “opened” exhausts inside of the feet and a different, open left hand. The GU-11 pod/handgun was taken OOB, it just received a shoulder belt created with painted masking tape. The single laser cannon on the head received a fairing made from paper tissue drenched with white glue.

 

Even though the model kit itself is not complex, it is a very early mecha kit: the VF-1 Battroids already came with vinyl caps (some of the contemporary ARII Macross models did not feature these useful items yet), but the model was constructed in an “onion layer” fashion that makes building and painting a protracted affair, esp. on arms and legs. You are supposed to finish a certain section, and then you add the next section like a clamp, while areas of the initial section become inaccessible for sanding and painting inside of the new section. You can only finish the single sections up to basic painting, mask them, and then add the next stage. Adding some joints during the construction phase helped but building an ARII VF-1 Battroid simply takes time and patience…

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, this Valkyrie’s livery is canonical and it depicts a so-called “Alaska Guard” VF-1, based at the U.N. Spacy’s headquarters at Eielson Air Force Base in the far North of the United States around 2008/9. Several Battroid mode VF-1s in this guise appear during episode #15 of the original Macross TV series and offer a good look at their front and back, even though close inspection reveals that the livery was – intentionally or incidentally – not uniform! There are subtle differences between the VF-1s from the same unit, so that there’s apparently some room for artistic freedom.

However, this rather decorative livery IMHO works best on a VF-1 Battroid model, because the green areas, esp. on head and arms, mostly disappears when the Valkyrie transforms into Fighter mode – in the original TV livery the VF-1 is completely white from above, just with green wing tips and rudders on the V-tail.

 

A full profile of an “Alaska Guard” VF-1 with more details concerning markings and stencils can furthermore be found in Softbank Publishing’s (discontinued) “Variable Fighter Master File VF-1 Valkyrie” source book, even though these drawings show further differences to the original TV appearance. In the book the unit is identified as SVF-15 “Blue Foxes”, evolved from the real USAF’s 18th Aggressor Squadron in 2008. Looking at the VF-1’s colors, this unit name appears a bit odd, because the livery is basically all-white with olive-green trim? This could be a simple translation issue, though, because “blue” and “green” are in written Japanese described with the same kanji (青, “ao”). On the other side, the 18th Aggressor Squadron was/is nicknamed “Blue Foxes”? Strange, strange…

 

To ease painting, the model was built in sub-assemblies (see comments above) and treated separately. To avoid brush painting mess with the basic white, the sub-sections received a coat of very light grey (RAL 7047 Telegrau) and a pure white tone, both applied from rattle cans with an attempt to create a light shading effect. The green trim and further details were added with brushes. I used Revell 360 (Fern Green, RAL 6025), because it is a strong but still somewhat dull/subdued tone that IMHO matches the look from the TV series well. Some detail areas like the air intake louvres, the hollow of the knees and the handgun were painted in medium grey (Humbrol 140), so that the contrast to the rest was not too strong. The “feet” received an initial coat of Humbrol 53 (Iron) as a dark primer.

 

In “reality”, parts of the VF-1’s torso in Battroid mode are actually open – the kit is very simplified. To create an optical illusion of this trench and to visually “stretch” the rather massive breast section, the respective areas were painted with dark grey (Humbrol 79). There are also many position lights all around the hull; these were initially laid out with silver, the bigger ones received felt tip pen details, and they were later overlaid with clear acrylic paints.

 

Once the basic painting had been done, a light black ink washing was applied to the parts to emphasize engraved panel lines and recesses. After that the jet exhaust ‘feet’ were painted with Humbrol’s Steel Metallizer and some post-shading through dry-brushing was done, concentrating on the green areas. This was rather done for visual plasticity than for a worn look: this Valkyrie was supposed to look quite bright and clean, after all it’s from a headquarter unit and not an active frontline vehicle.

The feet received a thorough graphite treatment, so that the Metallizer’s shine was further enhanced. Some surface details that were not molded into the parts (esp. around the shoulders and the covers of the main landing gear) were painted with a thin black felt tip pen.

 

Stencils and markings were taken from the kit’s OOB decal sheet. The thin bands around the arms and legs were created with generic 1mm decal strips and all the vernier thrusters (sixteen are visible on the Battroid) were created with home-printed decals – most of them are molded into the parts and apparently supposed to be painted, but the decals are a tidier and more uniform solution.

 

Before the final assembly, the parts received a coat with matt acrylic varnish. As final measures some black panel lines were emphasized with a felt tip pen and color was added to several lamps and small windows with clear paints.

  

I can hardly remember when I built my last VF-1 Battroid, but tackling this one after a long while was a nice distraction from my usual what-if builds. I am pleased that this model depicts a canonical Valkyrie from the original TV series beyond the well-known “hero” liveries. Furthermore, green is a rare color among VF-1 liveries, so that it is even more “collectible”.

While the vintage ARII kit is a rather limited affair, adding some joints considerably improved the model’s impression, even though there are definitively better kit options available today when you want to build a 1:100 Battroid — but these do certainly not provide this authentic “Eighties feeling”.

 

+++ 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 CAC Sabre, sometimes known as the Avon Sabre or CA-27, was an Australian variant of the North American Aviation F-86F Sabre fighter aircraft. In 1951, Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation obtained a license agreement to build the F-86F Sabre. In a major departure from the North American blueprint, it was decided that the CA-27 would be powered by a license-built version of the Rolls-Royce Avon R.A.7, rather than the General Electric J47. In theory, the Avon was capable of more than double the maximum thrust and double the thrust-to-weight ratio of the US engine. This necessitated a re-design of the fuselage, as the Avon was shorter, wider and lighter than the J47.

 

To accommodate the Avon, over 60 percent of the fuselage was altered and there was a 25 percent increase in the size of the air intake. Another major revision was in replacing the F-86F's six machine guns with two 30mm ADEN cannon, while other changes were also made to the cockpit and to provide an increased fuel capacity.

 

The prototype aircraft first flew on 3 August 1953. The production aircrafts' first deliveries to the Royal Australian Air Force began in 1954. The first batch of aircraft were powered by the Avon 20 engine and were designated the Sabre Mk 30. Between 1957 and 1958 this batch had the wing slats removed and were re-designated Sabre Mk 31. These Sabres were supplemented by 20 new-built aircraft. The last batch of aircraft were designated Sabre Mk 32 and used the Avon 26 engine, of which 69 were built up to 1961.

 

Beyond these land-based versions, an indigenous version for carrier operations had been developed and built in small numbers, too, the Sea Sabre Mk 40 and 41. The roots of this aircraft, which was rather a prestigious idea than a sensible project, could be traced back to the immediate post WWII era. A review by the Australian Government's Defence Committee recommended that the post-war forces of the RAN be structured around a Task Force incorporating multiple aircraft carriers. Initial plans were for three carriers, with two active and a third in reserve, although funding cuts led to the purchase of only two carriers in June 1947: Majestic and sister ship HMS Terrible, for the combined cost of AU£2.75 million, plus stores, fuel, and ammunition. As Terrible was the closer of the two ships to completion, she was finished without modification, and was commissioned into the RAN on 16 December 1948 as HMAS Sydney. Work progressed on Majestic at a slower rate, as she was upgraded with the latest technology and equipment. To cover Majestic's absence, the Colossus-class carrier HMS Vengeance was loaned to the RAN from 13 November 1952 until 12 August 1955.

 

Labour difficulties, late delivery of equipment, additional requirements for Australian operations, and the prioritization of merchant ships over naval construction delayed the completion of Majestic. Incorporation of new systems and enhancements caused the cost of the RAN carrier acquisition program to increase to AU£8.3 million. Construction and fitting out did not finish until October 1955. As the carrier neared completion, a commissioning crew was formed in Australia and first used to return Vengeance to the United Kingdom.

The completed carrier was commissioned into the RAN as HMAS Majestic on 26 October 1955, but only two days later, the ship was renamed Melbourne and recommissioned.

 

In the meantime, the rather political decision had been made to equip Melbourne with an indigenous jet-powered aircraft, replacing the piston-driven Hawker Fury that had been successfully operated from HMAS Sydney and HMAS Vengeance, so that the "new jet age" was even more recognizable. The choice fell on the CAC Sabre, certainly inspired by North American's successful contemporary development of the navalized FJ-2 Fury from the land-based F-86 Sabre. The CAC 27 was already a proven design, and with its more powerful Avon engine it even offered a better suitability for carrier operations than the FJ-2 with its rather weak J47 engine.

 

Work on this project, which was initially simply designated Sabre Mk 40, started in 1954, just when the first CAC 27's were delivered to operative RAAF units. While the navalized Avon Sabre differed outwardly only little from its land-based brethren, many details were changed and locally developed. Therefore, there was also, beyond the general outlines, little in common with the North American FJ-2 an -3 Fury.

Externally, a completely new wing with a folding mechanism was fitted. It was based on the F-86's so-called "6-3" wing, with a leading edge that was extended 6 inches at the root and 3 inches at the tip. This modification enhanced maneuverability at the expense of a small increase in landing speed due to deletion of the leading edge slats, a detail that was later introduced on the Sabre Mk 31, too. As a side benefit, the new wing leading edges without the slat mechanisms held extra fuel. However, the Mk 40's wing was different as camber was applied to the underside of the leading edge to improve low-speed handling for carrier operations. The wings were provided with four stations outboard of the landing gear wells for up to 1000 lb external loads on the inboard stations and 500 lb on the outboard stations.

 

Slightly larger stabilizers were fitted and the landing gear was strengthened, including a longer front wheel strut. The latter necessitated an enlarged front wheel well, so that the front leg’s attachment point had to be moved forward. A ventral launch cable hook was added under the wing roots and an external massive arrester hook under the rear fuselage.

Internally, systems were protected against salt and humidity and a Rolls-Royce Avon 211 turbojet was fitted, a downrated variant of the already navalized Avon 208 from the British DH Sea Vixen, but adapted to the different CAC 27 airframe and delivering 8.000 lbf (35.5 kN) thrust – slightly more than the engines of the land-based CAC Sabres, but also without an afterburner.

 

A single Mk 40 prototype was built from a new CAC 27 airframe taken directly from the production line in early 1955 and made its maiden flight on August 20th of the same year. In order to reflect its naval nature and its ancestry, this new CAC 27 variant was officially christened “Sea Sabre”.

Even though the modified machine handled well, and the new, cambered wing proved to be effective, many minor technical flaws were discovered and delayed the aircraft's development until 1957. These included the wing folding mechanism and the respective fuel plumbing connections, the landing gear, which had to be beefed up even more for hard carrier landings and the airframe’s structural strength for catapult launches, esp. around the ventral launch hook.

 

In the meantime, work on the land-based CAC 27 progressed in parallel, too, and innovations that led to the Mk 31 and 32 were also incorporated into the naval Mk 40, leading to the Sea Sabre Mk 41, which became the effective production aircraft. These updates included, among others, a detachable (but fixed) refueling probe under the starboard wing, two more pylons for light loads located under the wing roots and the capability to carry and deploy IR-guided AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, what significantly increased the Mk 41's efficiency as day fighter. With all these constant changes it took until April 1958 that the Sabre Mk 41, after a second prototype had been directly built to the new standard, was finally approved and cleared for production. Upon delivery, the RAN Sea Sabres carried a standard NATO paint scheme with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper surfaces and Sky undersides.

 

In the meantime, the political enthusiasm concerning the Australian carrier fleet had waned, so that only twenty-two aircraft were ordered. The reason behind this decision was that Australia’s carrier fleet and its capacity had become severely reduced: Following the first decommissioning of HMAS Sydney in 1958, Melbourne became the only aircraft carrier in Australian service, and she was unavailable to provide air cover for the RAN for up to four months in every year; this time was required for refits, refueling, personnel leave, and non-carrier duties, such as the transportation of troops or aircraft. Although one of the largest ships to serve in the RAN, Melbourne was one of the smallest carriers to operate in the post-World War II period, so that its contribution to military actions was rather limited. To make matters worse, a decision was made in 1959 to restrict Melbourne's role to helicopter operations only, rendering any carrier-based aircraft in Australian service obsolete. However, this decision was reversed shortly before its planned 1963 implementation, but Australia’s fleet of carrier-borne fixed-wing aircraft would not grow to proportions envisioned 10 years ago.

 

Nevertheless, on 10 November 1964, an AU£212 million increase in defense spending included the purchase of new aircraft for Melbourne. The RAN planned to acquire 14 Grumman S-2E Tracker anti-submarine aircraft and to modernize Melbourne to operate these. The acquisition of 18 new fighter-bombers was suggested (either Sea Sabre Mk 41s or the American Douglas A-4 Skyhawk), too, but these were dropped from the initial plan. A separate proposal to order 10 A-4G Skyhawks, a variant of the Skyhawk designed specifically for the RAN and optimized for air defense, was approved in 1965, but the new aircraft did not fly from Melbourne until the conclusion of her refit in 1969. This move, however, precluded the production of any new and further Sea Sabre.

 

At that time, the RAN Sea Sabres received a new livery in US Navy style, with upper surfaces in Light Gull Gray with white undersides. The CAC Sea Sabres remained the main day fighter and attack aircraft for the RAN, after the vintage Sea Furies had been retired in 1962. The other contemporary RAN fighter type in service, the Sea Venom FAW.53 all-weather fighter that had replaced the Furies, already showed its obsolescence.

In 1969, the RAN purchased another ten A-4G Skyhawks, primarily in order to replace the Sea Venoms on the carriers, instead of the proposed seventh and eighth Oberon-class submarines. These were operated together with the Sea Sabres in mixed units on board of Melbourne and from land bases, e.g. from NAS Nowra in New South Wales, where a number of Sea Sabres were also allocated to 724 Squadron for operational training.

 

Around 1970, Melbourne operated a standard air group of four jet aircraft, six Trackers, and ten Wessex helicopters until 1972, when the Wessexes were replaced with ten Westland Sea King anti-submarine warfare helicopters and the number of jet fighters doubled. Even though the A-4G’s more and more took over the operational duties on board of Melbourne, the Sea Sabres were still frequently deployed on the carrier, too, until the early Eighties, when both the Skyhawks and the Sea Sabres received once more a new camouflage, this time a wraparound scheme in two shades of grey, reflecting their primary airspace defense mission.

 

The CAC 27 Mk 41s’ last carrier operations took place in 1981 in the course of Melbourne’s involvements in two major exercises, Sea Hawk and Kangaroo 81, the ship’s final missions at sea. After Melbourne was decommissioned in 1984, the Fleet Air Arm ceased fixed-wing combat aircraft operation. This was the operational end of the Sabre Mk 41, which had reached the end of their airframe lifetime, and the Sea Sabre fleet had, during its career, severely suffered from accidents and losses: upon retirement, only eight of the original twenty-two aircraft still existed in flightworthy condition, so that the aircraft were all scrapped. The younger RAN A-4Gs were eventually sold to New Zealand, where they were kept in service until 2002.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 37 ft 6 in (11.43 m)

Wingspan: 37 ft 1 in (11.3 m)

Height: 14 ft 5 in (4.39 m)

Wing area: 302.3 sq ft (28.1 m²)

Empty weight: 12,000 lb (5,443 kg)

Loaded weight: 16,000 lb (7,256 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 21,210 lb (9,621 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Avon 208A turbojet engine with 8,200 lbf (36.44 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 700 mph (1,100 km/h) (605 knots)

Range: 1,153 mi, (1,000 NM, 1,850 km)

Service ceiling: 52,000 ft (15,850 m)

Rate of climb: 12,000 ft/min at sea level (61 m/s)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm ADEN cannons with 150 rounds per gun

5,300 lb (2,400 kg) of payload on six external hardpoints;

Bombs were usually mounted on outer two pylons as the mid pair were wet-plumbed pylons for

2× 200 gallons drop tanks, while the inner pair was usually occupied by a pair of AIM-9 Sidewinder

AAMs

A wide variety of bombs could be carried with maximum standard loadout being 2x 1,000 lb bombs

or 2x Matra pods with unguided SURA missiles plus 2 drop tanks for ground attacks, or 2x AIM-9 plus

two drop tanks as day fighter

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was initially inspired by a set of decals from an ESCI A-4G which I had bought in a lot – I wondered if I could use it for a submission to the “In the navy” group build at whatifmodelers.com in early 2020. I considered an FJ-3M in Australian colors on this basis and had stashed away a Sword kit of that aircraft for this purpose. However, I had already built an FJ variant for the GB (a kitbashed mix of an F-86D and an FJ-4B in USMC colors), and was reluctant to add another Fury.

 

This spontaneously changed after (thanks to Corona virus quarantine…) I cleaned up one of my kit hoards and found a conversion set for a 1:72 CAC 27 from JAYS Model Kits which I had bought eons ago without a concrete plan. That was the eventual trigger to spin the RAN Fury idea further – why not a navalized version of the Avon Sabre for HMAS Melbourne?

 

The result is either another kitbash or a highly modified FJ-3M from Sword. The JAYS Model Kits set comes with a THICK sprue that carries two fuselage halves and an air intake, and it also offers a vacu canopy as a thin fallback option because the set is actually intended to be used together with a Hobby Craft F-86F.

 

While the parts, molded in a somewhat waxy and brittle styrene, look crude on the massive sprue, the fuselage halves come with very fine recessed engravings. And once you have cleaned the parts (NOTHING for people faint at heart, a mini drill with a saw blade is highly recommended), their fit is surprisingly good. The air intake was so exact that no putty was needed to blend it with the rest of the fuselage.

 

The rest came from the Sword kit and integrating the parts into the CAC 27 fuselage went more smoothly than expected. For instance, the FJ-3M comes with a nice cockpit tub that also holds a full air intake duct. Thanks to the slightly wider fuselage of the CAC 27, it could be mounted into the new fuselage halves without problems and the intake duct almost perfectly matches the intake frame from the conversion set. The tailpipe could be easily integrated without any mods, too. The fins had to be glued directly to the fuselage – but this is the way how the Sword kit is actually constructed! Even the FJ-3M’s wings match the different fuselage perfectly. The only modifications I had to make is a slight enlargement of the ventral wing opening at the front and at the read in order to take the deeper wing element from the Sword kit, but that was an easy task. Once in place, the parts blend almost perfectly into each other, just minor PSR was necessary to hide the seams!

 

Other mods include an extended front wheel well for the longer leg from the FJ-3M and a scratched arrester hook installation, made from wire, which is on purpose different from the Y-shaped hook of the Furies.

 

For the canopy I relied on the vacu piece that came with the JAYS set. Fitting it was not easy, though, it took some PSR to blend the windscreen into the rest of the fuselage. Not perfect, but O.K. for such a solution from a conversion set.

 

The underwing pylons were taken from the Sword kit, including the early Sidewinders. I just replaced the drop tanks – the OOB tanks are very wide, and even though they might be authentic for the FJ-3, I was skeptical if they fit at all under the wings with the landing gear extended? In order to avoid trouble and for a more modern look, I replaced them outright with more slender tanks, which were to mimic A-4 tanks (USN FJ-4s frequently carried Skyhawk tanks). They actually come from a Revell F-16 kit, with modified fins. The refueling probe comes from the Sword kit.

 

A last word about the Sword kit: much light, but also much shadow. While I appreciate the fine surface engravings, the recognizably cambered wings, a detailed cockpit with a two-piece resin seat and a pretty landing gear as well as the long air intake, I wonder why the creators totally failed to provide ANY detail of the arrester hook (there is literally nothing, as if this was a land-based Sabre variant!?) or went for doubtful solutions like a front landing gear that consists of five(!) single, tiny parts? Sadism? The resin seat was also broken (despite being packed in a seperate bag), and it did not fit into the cockpit tub at all. Meh!

  

Painting and markings:

From the start I planned to give the model the late RAN A-4Gs’ unique air superiority paint scheme, which was AFAIK introduced in the late Seventies: a two-tone wraparound scheme consisting of “Light Admiralty Grey” (BS381C 697) and “Aircraft Grey” (BS 381C 693). Quite simple, but finding suitable paints was not an easy task, and I based my choice on pictures of the real aircraft (esp. from "buzz" number 880 at the Fleet Air Arm Museum, you find pics of it with very good light condition) rather than rely on (pretty doubtful if not contradictive) recommendations in various painting instructions from models or decal sets.

 

I wanted to keep things simple and settled upon Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231) and Light Blue (FS 35414), both enamel colors from Modelmaster, since both are rather dull interpretations of these tones. Esp. the Light Blue comes quite close to Light Admiralty Grey, even though it should be lighter for more contrast to the darker grey tone. But it has that subtle greenish touch of the original BS tone, and I did not want to mix the colors.

 

The pattern was adapted from the late A-4Gs’ scheme, and the colors were dulled down even more through a light black ink wash. Some post-shading with lighter tones emphasized the contrast between the two colors again. And while it is not an exact representation of the unique RAN air superiority scheme, I think that the overall impression is there.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey, while the landing gear, its wells and the inside of the air intake became white. A red rim was painted around the front opening, and the landing gear covers received a red outline, too. The white drop tanks are a detail I took from real world RAN A-4Gs - in the early days of the air superiority scheme, the tanks were frequently still finished in the old USN style livery, hence the white body but fins and tail section already in the updated colors.

 

The decals became a fight, though. As mentioned above, the came from an ESCI kit – and, as expected, the were brittle. All decals with a clear carrier film disintegrated while soaking in water, only those with a fully printed carrier film were more or less usable. One roundel broke and had to be repaired, and the checkered fin flash was a very delicate affair that broke several times, even though I tried to save and repair it with paint. But you can unfortunately see the damage.

 

Most stencils and some replacements (e. g. the “Navy” tag) come from the Sword FJ-3. While these decals are crisply printed, their carrier film is utterly thin, so thin that applying esp. the larger decals turned out to be hazardous and complicated. Another point that did not really convince me about the Sword kit.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and some soot stains were added around the exhaust and the gun ports with graphite.

  

In the end, this build looks, despite the troubles and the rather exotic ingredients like a relatively simple Sabre with Australian markings, just with a different Navy livery. You neither immediately recognize the FJ-3 behind it, nor the Avon Sabre’s bigger fuselage, unless you take a close and probably educated look. Very subtle, though.

The RAN air superiority scheme from the late Skyhawks suits the Sabre/Fury-thing well – I like the fact that it is a modern fighter scheme, but, thanks to the tones and the colorful other markings, not as dull and boring like many others, e. g. the contemporary USN "Ghost" scheme. Made me wonder about an early RAAF F-18 in this livery - should look very pretty, too?

Celebrity Row, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base boneyard, Tucson, Arizona

 

DSC_0423 Anx2 1200h Q90

Most exciting moment, zigzag high and low ride was from Khagrachari to Sajek Valley in my life. If a person capable to completing the journey from the roof of the Chader Gari, person will seen the real hill view, what is amazing, though its too dangerous and tough to seat their from beginning to end.

 

Another exciting thing what I got in mid night, it clear sky and full stars and I was sitting in the middle of the road where no people. When spent sometime with the stars and I saw moon just rising over from the big hill Woow! that's actually really cool and worth looking for me. What I enjoyed lonely atmost 2 hours. May be for geting this I will go again. When in the morning I opened my eyes in fully sleepy mood and saw over my balcony, I astonished.....my sleepy mood had gone.....it was just full of cloud where no hill view was visible...amazing it was, really enjoyed.

 

Some guidance should provide from authorities because they takes entry fee, they should provide atleast a leaflet about what to do and what not to do, where to go and where not to go and the cleanness about the place.

 

All over, it's a beautiful place to visit but we should be more careful to not do anything what is destroy our nature.

« •🌿• » ѕανє συя gяєєη « •🌿• » ѕανє συя Nature « •🌿• » .

 

Beauty, Amazing whatever I said it is not enough and unexplainable feelings to express to anyone what is what. So if you want to see something, feel something, enjoy something then go and visit the valley. See it yourself. It has four seasons four different tast. Just one I looked there.

 

Ah! one last thing...the Nicest, fantastic and cool guy Mr. Sabbir Ansary Riyadh. Thousands of thanks to him for giving me chance to see tremendous beautiful valley. He is a tremendous helper from evey bit of side, thats why I like him a lot. He have flavour, if you want to catch his flavour for tast of yours.....then go.....

Touronto Travelers Group

Office : 292, Shatabdi Center,

Fakirapool, Motijheel,

Dhaka-1000,

Bangladesh।

Mobile: +8801511082947

Email : tourontobd@gmail.com

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

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

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

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

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

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

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

 

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

 

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

  

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

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Douglas A-4 Skyhawk was a single seat subsonic carrier-capable attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta winged, single turbojet engined Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. It was originally designated A4D under the U.S. Navy's pre-1962 designation system.

 

The Skyhawk was a relatively lightweight aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 24,500 pounds (11,100 kg) in its late versions and had a top speed of more than 670 miles per hour (1,080 km/h). The aircrafts supported a variety of missiles, bombs and other munitions, and late versions were capable of carrying a bomb load equivalent to that of a World War II-era Boeing B-17 bomber.

 

The type saw an intensive career with the US Navy and the US Marine Corps, and is still in frontline use in several countries, e. g. Brazil and Argentina.

Another potential user was France. The story began with two different design requirements in the early 1950s for land-based, light fighters, one for the French Air Force and the other for NATO air forces. French manufacturer Dassault responded and used the same basic design for both these specifications, designated as the Étendard II and Étendard VI respectively, neither of which received any orders, though. The company also developed a larger and more powerful variant, which was called the Mystère XXIV, simultaneously as a private venture.

 

The French Navy, the Aéronavale, showed interest in the more powerful aircraft, and this interest in a lulti-purpose fighter for carrier operations led to a public competition which was opened to foreign submissions, too. Dassault constructed a prototype navalized version of the Mystère XXIV, now designated Étendard IVM, and the first prototype conducted its first flight on 24 July 1956. As contenders, Douglas offered a modified A4D-2 Skyhawk and from Great Britain the Supermarine Scimitar was proposed, but immediately rejected as being much too large and complex for the Aéronavale's needs.

 

In order to compare the potential contenders, the Étendard IVM was to be pitted against the Skyhawk, and so a total of six so-called A4D-2Fs, modified to French specifications, took part in an extensive field test over the course of the next 15 months against a total of seven Étendard prototypes (the last being a prototype for the Étendard IVP photo reconnaissance variant), which differed by engines and equipment details.

 

The French Skyhawk variant had, compared with the standard A4D-2 of the US Navy, improved navigation and flight control systems. The A4D-2F also featured a strengthened airframe and had air-to-air refueling capabilities. Specific to these machines were a TACAN receiver and a braking parachute under the tail for land operations.

 

Internal armament was, upon the potential customer’s request, changed from the original pair of American 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk 12 cannon with 200 RPG in the wing roots to a pair of 30mm DEFA cannon with 150 RPG. As a marketing measure, the A4D-2F was equipped with guidance avionics for the American AGM-12 Bullpup missile, in hope that France would procure this weapon together with the aircraft as a package and open the door for further weapon exports. Other ordnance included rocket pods, bombs, and drop tanks, carried on five external pylons (two more under the outer wings than the standard A4D-2).

 

Not being convinced of the AGM-12 and political preference of domestic equipment, French officials insisted on additional avionics for indigenous guided weapons like the Nord AA-20 air-to-air or the AS-20 air-to-ground missiles, as well as for the bigger, newly developed AS-30. Since the internal space of the AD4 airframe was limited, these additional components had to be housed in a long, spinal fairing that extended from the fin root forward, almost up to the cockpit. Another consequence of the scarce internal space was the need to provide radio-guidance for the French missiles through an external antenna pod, which was to be carried under the outer starboard pylon, together with two missiles on the inner pylons and an SNEB unguided missile pod (frequently empty) under the port outer pylon as aerodynamic counterbalance.

 

Trials between the contenders started in summer 1957, at first from land bases (primarily Landviseau in Brittany), but later, after its reconstruction with a four degree angled flight deck and a mirror landing sight, also aboard of the revamped French carrier ‘Arromanches’ (R 95, former HMS Colossus). The A4D-2F turned out to be the more effective fighter bomber, especially concerning the almost twice as high weapon load as the Étendard’s. On the other side, the Étendard benefitted from its Aida radar (the A4D-2F only had an AN/APN-141 radar altimeter and a state-of-the-art AN/ASN-19A navigation computer) and from strong supporters from both military and political deciders. Dassault kept lobbying for the indigenous aircraft, too, and, despite many shortcomings and limitations, the Étendard was chosen as the winning design. Even a proposed radar upgrade (just introduced with the A4D-3/A-4C for the US Navy) was during the late evaluation stages in 1958 would not change the French officials’ minds.

 

“Sufficiently satisfied” with its performance, the French Navy would procure for 69 Étendard IVM fighters and 21 Étendard IVP reconnaissance versions. The sextet of test Skyhawks was returned in late 1961 to the United States, where the airframes were at first stored and later underwent modifications at Lockheed Service Co. to become A-4Ps for the Argentine Air Force, delivered in 1966.

 

From 1962, the winning Étendard IVM was being deployed aboard the service's newly built Clemenceau-class aircraft carriers, the Clemenceau and Foch. Later, in 1972, the Skyhawk (in the form of a modified A-4M) made a return to France as an alternative to the stillborn Jaguar M, a navalized variant of the Anglo-French SEPECAT Jaguar, which was intended to become the Étendard's replacement. But this effort was once more derailed by political lobbying by Dassault, who favored their own proposed upgraded version of the aircraft, which would later enter service as the Super Étendard.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 39' 4" (12 m)

Wingspan: 26 ft 6 in (8.38 m)

Height: 15 ft (4.57 m)

Wing area: 259 ft² (24.15 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 0008-1.1-25 root, NACA 0005-0.825-50 tip

Empty weight: 9,146 lb (4,152 kg)

Loaded weight: 18,300 lb (8,318 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 lb (11,136 kg)

 

Powerplant:

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

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 575 kn (661 mph, 1,064 km/h)

Range: 1,700 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,220 km)

Combat radius: 625 nmi, 1,158 km

Service ceiling: 42,250 ft (12,880 m)

Rate of climb: 8,440 ft/min (43 m/s)

Wing loading: 70.7 lb/ft² (344.4 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.51

g-limit: +8/-3 g

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA cannon, 150 RPG, in the wing roots

Total effective payload of up to 5,000 lbs (2,268 kg) on five hardpoints

- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lbs capability

- 2× Inboard wing: 2,200 lbs capability each

- 2× Outboard wing: 1,000 lbs capability each

   

The kit and its assembly:

This is another contribution to the “In the Navy” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com. The idea of a French Navy Skyhawk is not new and has been tackled before (in the form of CG renditions and model hardware alike), and I had been wanting to build one, too, for a long time – and the current GB was a good occasion to tackle a build.

 

The Skyhawk was actually tested by the Aéronavale, but, as described in the background, not until the early 1970s and together with the LTV A-7, when the Jaguar M came to nothing, not in the late 1950ies where this fictional model is rooted.

Anyway, I liked the Fifties idea much and spun a story around the Étendard’s introduction and a fictional competition for the Aéronavale’s next carrier-borne fighter bomber. The idea was further fueled by the relatively new Airfix model of the early A-4B, which would fit well into the project’s time frame. And I already had a respective kit stashed away for this project...

 

The Airfix kit is very nice, fit and detail (including, for instance a complete air intake section with a jet fan dummy, and it features a very good pilot figure, too) are excellent, even though some things like very thick sprue attachment points here and there and the waxy, rather soft styrene are a bit dubious. But it’s a good kit, nevertheless, and cleverly constructed: many seams disappear between natural panel lines, it’s a pleasant build.

 

Since this model was to be a kind of pre-production machine based on a relatively new standard aircraft, not much was changed. Most visible additions are the dorsal spine (a simple piece of sprue, blended onto the back and into the fin fillet) and the ordnance.

But there are minor changes, too: The cannon installation was also modified, from the original wing root position into slightly lower, bulged fairings for the more voluminous DEFA cannon. The fairings were carved from styrene profiles and outfitted with the OOB barrels. IDF Skyhawks/Ahit with 30mm cannons were the design benchmark, blending the fairings into the curved wing roots and hiding the original gun openings was actually the most challenging part of the build.

 

Some pitots and blade antennae were replaced or changed, too. Lead was cramped into the space between the cockpit and the air intake installation for a proper stance. The Airfix kit is in so far nice as this compartment is easily accessible from below, as long as the wings have not been mounted yet.

The cockpit, together with the pilot figure, were taken OOB, just the pilot’s head was modified to look sideways and an ejection trigger handle was added to the seat.

 

The pair of AS-30 once were AS-30Ls from an Italeri Mirage 2000 kit, slightly modified with a simple, conical tip and booster rocket nozzles on the tail. The corresponding underwing radar pod is a drop tank from a vintage Airfix Kaman Seasprite, while the other outer pylon carries a scratched camera pod, IIRC it once was a belly tank from a 1:144 F-16.

  

Painting and markings:

On purpose, relatively simple. The early French Étendard IVM was the benchmark with its blue-gray/white livery. Biggest challenges were actually to find an appropriate tone for the upper gray, which appears, much like the British Extra Dark Sea Gray, between anything from dark blue to medium gray, depending on light and surroundings, esp. with a glossy finish.

I could not find any definitive or convincing paint suggestions, what I found ranges between FS 36270 (Medium Gray, much too light) and FS 36118 (Gunship Gray, much too violet) and Humbrol 77 (Navy Blue, much too green) to a mix of Humbrol 57 and 33 (Sky Blue + Black!). Really weird… And to make matters worse, some Étendards were furthermore painted in a lighter blue-gray for operations over the Mediterranean Sea!

 

Since I wanted a unique tone, I settled upon Revell 79 (RAL 7031, Blaugrau) for the upper surfaces, a dark, petrol blue gray. The undersides were painted in an off-white tone (a grayish Volkswagen color from the Seventies!) with acrylic paint from the rattle can – with the benefit that the whole landing gear could be primed in the same turn, even though it was later painted over with pure white (Humbrol 130), which was also used on/in the air intakes. The cockpit interior was painted in bluish gray (FS 35237), the interior of the air brakes, slats and edges of the landing gear covers became bright red (Humbrol 60). The red markings around the air intakes were created with paint and decals. Another eye-catcher are the bright orange AS-30 test rounds.

 

A thin, black ink wash was applied to the kit in order to emphasize the engraved panel lines. Only light shading was added to the panels through dry-brushing, more for presentation drama than true weathering.

 

Most Aéronavale-specific markings come from an Academy Super Étendard decal sheet, most stencils come from the OOB Skyhawk sheet. As a kind of prototype and part of Douglas’ fictional marketing effort for the machine, I placed the French roundels in six positions and also added French flags ( the Étendard prototypes were similarly decorated, by the way). Finally, everything was sealed under a coat of matt varnish with a slight, sheen finish.

  

A relatively simple whif project, and a nice distraction from the many recent kitbashes and major conversions. The Aéronavale livery suits the Scooter well, and what I personally like a lot about this one is that it “tells the story” behind it – it’s more than a generic Skyhawk in French colors.

 

And, as a final twist of history, nowadays the Skyhawk actually IS in use on board of a French carrier: in the form of the Brazilian Naval Aviation’s AF-1, former Kuwaiti A-4KU airframes, from CV Sao Paulo, former French Navy carrier Foch! :D

 

The Badshahi Mosque (Urdu: بادشاھی مسجد), or the 'Emperor's Mosque', was built in 1673 by the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb in Lahore, Pakistan. It is one of the city's best known landmarks, and a major tourist attraction epitomising the beauty and grandeur of the Mughal era.

 

Capable of accommodating over 55,000 worshipers, it is the second largest mosque in Pakistan, after the Faisal Mosque in Islamabad. The architecture and design of the Badshahi Masjid is closely related to the Jama Masjid in Delhi, India, which was built in 1648 by Aurangzeb's father and predecessor, emperor Shah Jahan.

 

Badshahi Masjid is one of the locations where Qari' Abdul Basit recited the Qur'an.[citation needed] The Imam-e-Kaaba (Sheikh Abdur-Rahman Al-Sudais of Saudi Arabia) has also led prayers in this mosque in 2007.

 

History

 

The mosque was built under the patronage of the sixth Mughal Emperor, Aurangzeb Alamgir. It was completed in 1673 under the supervision of Aurangzeb's foster brother Muzaffar Hussain (also known as Fidaie Khan Koka) who was appointed governor of Lahore in May 1671 and held this post until 1675. He was also Master of Ordnance to the emperor. The construction of the mosque took about two years from May 1671 to April 1673. The mosque was built opposite the Lahore Fort, illustrating its stature in the Mughal Empire. In conjunction with the building of the mosque, a new gate was built at the fort, named Alamgiri Gate after the Emperor.

 

Badshahi Mosque was badly damaged and was misused during Sikh Rule. During the reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the mosque was used as a stable for the army's horses.[1][2] They also would steal the jewels from the mosque, such as marble, rubies, gold, and other valuables. Muslims were not allowed to enter the mosque to worship; they were only given a small place outside the mosque where they could worship.

Even when the British took control of India, they would use the mosque for their military practices by using the mosque for gun practices, cannons, etc. Even when they sensed Muslim hate for the British, they demolished a large portion of the wall of the mosque so the Muslims could not use it as a kind of "fort" for anti-British reasons. After a while, they finally returned it to the Muslims as a good will gesture even though it was in terrible condition. It was then given to Badshahi Mosque Authority to restore it to its original glory.

 

From 1852 onwards, piecemeal repairs were carried out under the supervision of the Badshahi Mosque Authority. Extensive repairs were carried out from 1939 to 1960 at a cost of about 4.8 million rupees, which brought the mosque to its original shape and condition. The blueprint for the repairs was prepared by the late architect Nawab Zen Yar Jang Bahadur.

 

In 2000, the repair work of marble inlay in the main vault was repaired under the supervision of Saleem Anjum Qureshi.

 

On the occasion of the second Islamic Summit held at Lahore on February 22, 1974, thirty-nine heads of Muslim states offered their Friday prayers in the Badshahi Masjid, led by Maulana Abdul Qadir Azad, the 'Khatib' of the mosque.

 

Recently a small museum has also been added to the mosque complex. It contains relics of Muhammad(peace be upon him), his cousin Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), and his daughter, Hazrat Fatima Zahra (may Allah be pleased with her). On August 14, 1947, the Pakistani people celebrated their independence from the British command.

 

Pakistan(Urdu: "land of the pure"), a country of 160 million people, is now the second most populous country in the Muslim world.

 

Hailed as the country's cultural capital, Lahore – also known as the "Heart of Pakistan" – is rich with many examples of Moghul architecture.

 

Design Characteristics

Like the character of its founder, the mosque is bold, vast and majestic in its expression. It was the largest mosque in the world for a long time.

The interior has rich embellishment in stucco tracery (Manbatkari) and paneling with a fresco touch, all in bold relief, as well as marble inlay.

The exterior is decorated with stone carving as well as marble inlay on red sandstone, specially of lotiform motifs in bold relief. The embellishment has Indo-Greek, Central Asian and Indian architectural influence both in technique and motifs.

 

The skyline is furnished by beautiful ornamental merlons inlaid with marble lining adding grace to the perimeter of the mosque. In its various architectural features like the vast square courtyard, the side aisles (dalans), the four corner minars, the projecting central transept of the prayer chamber and the grand entrance gate, is summed up the history of development of mosque architecture of the Muslim world over the thousand years prior to its construction in 1673.

 

The north enclosure wall of the mosque was laid close to the Ravi River bank, so a majestic gateway could not be provided on that side and, to keep the symmetry the gate had to be omitted on the south wall as well. Thus a four Aiwan plan like the earlier Delhi Jamia Masjid could not be adopted here.

 

The walls were built with small kiln-burnt bricks laid in kankar, lime mortar (a kind of hydraulic lime) but have a veneer of red sandstone. The steps leading to the prayer chamber and its plinth are in variegated marble.

 

The prayer chamber is very deep and is divided into seven compartments by rich engraved arches carried on very heavy piers. Out of the 7 compartments, three double domes finished in marble have superb curvature, whilst the rest have curvilinear domes with a central rib in their interior and flat roof above. In the eastern front aisle, the ceiling of the compartment is flat (Qalamdani) with a curved border (ghalatan) at the cornice level.

 

The original floor of the courtyard was laid with small kiln-burnt bricks laid in the Mussalah pattern. The present red sandstone flooring was laid during the last thorough repairs (1939-60). Similarly, the original floor of the prayer chamber was in cut and dressed bricks with marble and Sang-i-Abri lining forming Mussalah and was also replaced by marble Mussalah during the last repairs.

 

There are only two inscriptions in the mosque:

 

one on the gateway

the other of Kalimah in the prayer chamber under the main high vault.

 

Measurements

Courtyard: 528'-8" x 528'-4" (Area: 278,784 sq ft (25,899.9 m2)), divided into two levels: the upper and the lower. In the latter, funeral prayers can also be offered.

Prayer Chamber: 275'-8" x 83'-7" x 50'-6" high, with its main vault 37'-3" x 59'-4" high but with the merlons 74'-6". (Area: 22,825 sq ft (2,120.5 m2))

Corner Minars: 67' in circumference, 176'-4" high are in four stages and have a contained staircase with 204 steps.

Central Dome: Diameter 65' at bottom (at bulging 70'-6"); height 49'; pinnacle 24 ft (7.3 m) and neck 15 ft (4.6 m) high.

Side Domes: Diameter 51'-6" (at bulging 54'-2"); height 32 ft (9.8 m); pinnacle 19 ft (5.8 m); neck 9'-6" high.

Gateway: 66'-7" x 62'-10" x 65 high including domelets; vault 21'-6" x 32'-6" high. Its three sided approach steps are 22 in number.

Side aisles (Dalans): 80 in number. Height above floor 23'-9"; plinth 2'-7".

Central Tank: 50' x 50' x 3' deep (Area: 2,500 sq ft (230 m2))""""""""""" """

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The basic VF-1 was built and deployed in four minor variants (designated A, J, and S single-seater and the D two-seater/trainer) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie exoskeleton with enhanced protection and integrated missile launchers, the so-called FAST (“Fuel And Sensor Tray”) packs that created the fully space-capable "Super" Valkyries and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Super Valkyrie”.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several original variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), even though these machines were frequently updated and modified during their career, leading to a wide range of sub-variants and different standards.

 

Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design. One of these post-war designs became the VF-1EX, a replica variant of the VF-1J with up-to-date avionics and instrumentation. It was only built in small numbers in the late 2040s and was a dedicated variant for advanced training with dissimilar mock aerial and ground fighting.

 

The only operator of this type was Xaos (sometimes spelled as Chaos), a private and independent military and civilian contractor. Xaos was originally a fold navigation business that began venturing into fold wave communication and information, expanding rapidly during the 2050s and entering new business fields like flight tests and providing aggressor aircraft for military training. They were almost entirely independent from the New United Nations Spacy (NUNS) and was led by the mysterious Lady M. During the Vár Syndrome outbreak, Echo Squadron and Delta Flight and the tactical sound unit Thrones and Walküre were formed to counteract its effects in the Brísingr Globular Cluster.

 

The VF-1EX was restricted to its primary objective and never saw real combat. The replica unit retained the overall basic performance of the original VF-1 Valkyrie, the specifications being more than sufficient for training and mock combat. The only difference was the addition of the contemporary military EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system for the pilot as an emergency standard, an exoskeleton unit with personal inner-wear, two variable geometry wings, two hybrid jet/rocket engines, mechanical hardware for the head, torso, arms and legs. This feature gave the VF-1EX its new designation.

Furthermore, the VF-1EX was also outfitted with other electronic contingency functions like AI-assisted flight and remote override controls. Some of these features could be disabled according to necessity or pilot preferences. The gun pod unit was retained but was usually only loaded with paintball rounds for mock combat. For the same purpose, one of the original Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head unit" was replaced by a long-range laser target designator. AMM-1 missiles with dummy warheads or other training ordnance could be added to the wing hardpoints, but the VF-1EX was never seen being equipped this way - it remained an agile dogfighter.

  

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid. 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system.

 

Accommodation:

Single pilot in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

 

Dimensions:

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard take-off mass: 18.5 metric tons

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2);

4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard TOW 2.49; maximum TOW 1.24

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

1x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head" unit, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm

4x underwing hardpoints for a wide variety of ordnance

  

The kit and its assembly:

The VF-1EX Valkyrie is a Variable Fighter introduced in the Macross Δ television series, and it's, as described above, a replica training variant that resembles outwardly the VF-1J. There's even a Hasegawa 1:72 kit from 2016 of this obscure variant.

However, what I tried to recreate is a virtual (and purely fictional/non-canonical) VF-1EX, re-skinned by someone called David L. on the basis of a virtual VF-1S 3D model with a 2 m wing span (sounds like ~1:8 scale) for the Phoenix R/C simulator software. Check this for reference: www.supermotoxl.com/projects-articles/ready-to-drive-fly-...). How bizarre can things be/become? And how sick is a hardware model of it, though...?

 

I found the complex livery very attractive and had the plan to build a 1:100 model for some years now. But it took this long to gather enough mojo to tackle this project, due to the tricolor paint scheme's complex nature...

The "canvas" for this stunt is a vintage Arii 1:100 VF-1 kit, built OOB except for some standard mods. The kit was actually a VF-1A, but I had a spare VF-1J head unit in store as a suitable replacement. Externally, some dorsal blade aerials and vanes on the nose were added, the attachment points under the wings for the pylons were PSRed away. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit because this model would be displayed in flight. As a consequence, the ventral gun pod received an adapter at its tail and I added one of my home-brew wire displays, created on the basis of the kit's OOB plastic base.

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, this VF-1 is based on a re-skinned virtual R/C model, and its creator apparently took inspiration from a canonical VF fighter, namely a VF-31C "Siegfried", and specifically the "Mirage Farina Jenius Custom" version from the Macross Δ series that plays around 2051. Screenshots from the demo flight video under the link above provided various perspectives as painting reference, but the actual implementation on the tiny model caused serious headaches.

The VF-1's shapes are rather round and curvy, the model's jagged surface and small size prohibited masking. The kit is IMHO also best built and painted in single sub-assemblies, but upon closer inspection the screenshots revealed some marking inconsistencies (apparently edited from various videos?), and certain areas were left uncertain, e .g. the inside of the legs or the whole belly area. Therefore, this model is just a personal interpretation of the design, and as such I also deviated in the markings.

 

The paints became Humbrol 20 (Crimson) and 58 (Magenta), plus Revell 301 (Semi-gloss White), and they were applied with brushes. To replicate the edgy and rather fragmented pattern I initially laid down the two reds in a rather rough and thin fashion and painted the white dorsal and ventral areas. Once thoroughly dry, the white edges were quasi-masked with white decal material, either with stripes of various widths or tailored from sheet material, e. g. for the "wedges" on the wings and fins and the dorsal "swallow tail". This went more smoothly than expected, with a very convincing and clean result that i'd never had achieved with brushes alone, even with masking attempts, which would probably have led to chaos and too much paint on the model.

 

Other details like the grey leading edges or the air intakes were created with grey and black decal material, too.

No weathering was done, since the aircraft would be clean and in pristine condition, but I used a soft pencil to emphasize the engraved panel lines, esp. on white background. The gun pod became grey and the exhausts, painted in Revell 91 (Iron), were treated with graphite for a darker shade and a more metallic look.

 

Stencils came from the kit's OOB sheet, but only a few, since there was already a lot "going on" on the VF-1's hull. The flash-shaped Xaos insignia and the NUNS markings on legs and wings were printed at home - as well as the small black vernier thrusters all around the hull, for a uniform look. The USN style Modex and the small letter code on the fins came from an Colorado Decals F-5 sheet, for an aggressor aircraft.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed overall with semi-gloss acrlyic varnish (which turned out glossier than expected...) and position lights etc. added with translucent paint on top of a silver base.

  

Well, while the VF-1 was built OOB with no major mods and just some cosmetical upgrades, the paint scheme and its finish were more demanding - and I am happy that the "decal masking" trick worked so fine. The paint scheme surely is attractive, even though it IMHO does not really takes the VF-1's lines into account. Nevertheless, I am certain that there are not many models that are actually based on a virtual 1:8 scale 3D model of an iconic SF fighter, so that this VF-1EX might be unique.

 

+++ 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 Focke Wulf Ta 338 originated as a response of request by the RLM in mid 1943 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), optimized for the interceptor and point defense role and without a hazardous liquid rocket engine as means of propulsion. In the course of the year, several German manufacturers responded with a multitude of highly innovative if not unusual design, including Heinkel with the ducted fan project "Lerche", Rheinmetall-Borsig with a jet-powered tailsitter, and Focke Wulf. This company’s engineering teams submitted two designs: the revolutionary "Triebflügel" concept and the more conservative, yet still futuristic "P.03.10338" tail sitter proposal, conceived by Focke Wulf’s leading engineer Kurt Tank and Walter Kappus from BMW, responsible for the engine development.

 

The P.03.10338 was based on the proven Fw 190 fighter, but the similarities were only superficial. Only the wings and a part of the fuselage structure around the cockpit would be used, but Tank assumed that using existing parts and tools would appreciably reduce development and production time.

A great part of the fuselage structure had to be re-designed to accommodate a powerful BMW 803 engine and its integral gearbox for an eight-bladed contraprop.

 

The BMW 803 was BMW's attempt to build a high-output aircraft engine, primarily for heavy bombers, by basically "coupling" two BMW 801 engines back-to-back into a single and very compact power unit. The result was a 28-cylinder, four-row radial engine, each comprising a multiple-bank in-line engine with two cylinders in each bank, which, due to cooling concerns, were liquid cooled.

 

This arrangement was from the start intended to drive independent contra-rotating propellers, in order to avoid stiffness problems with the whole engine driving just a single crankshaft and also to simply convert the raw power of this unit into propulsion. The front half of the engine drove the front propeller directly, while the rear engine drove a number of smaller shafts that passed between the cylinders of the front engine before being geared back together to drive the rear prop. This complex layout resulted in a rather large and heavy gearbox on the front of the engine, and the front engine needing an extended shaft to "clear" that gearbox. The four-row 803 engine weighed 2,950 kg (6,490 lb) dry and 4,130 kg (9,086 lb) fully loaded, and initial versions delivered 3,900 PS (3,847 hp; 2,868 kW).

 

While the engine was heavy and there were alternatives with a better weight/output ratio (e. g. the Jumo 222), the BMW 803 was favored for this project because it was the most powerful engine available, and it was relatively compact so that it could be fitted into a fighter's airframe. On the P.03.10338 it drove an all-metal, eight-blade contraprop with a diameter of 4,25 m (13 ft 11 in).

 

In order to accept this massive engine, the P.03.10338’s structure had to be stiffened and the load-bearing structures re-arranged. The aircraft kept the Fw 190's wing structure and surface, but the attachment points at the fuselage had to be moved for the new engine mount, so that they ended up in mid position. The original space for the Fw 190's landing gear was used for a pair of radiator baths in the wings' inner leading edge, the port radiator catering to the front engine half while the radiator on starboard was connected with the rear half. An additional annular oil and sodium cooler for the gearbox and the valve train, respectively, was mounted in the fuselage nose.

 

The tail section was completely re-designed. Instead of the Fw 190's standard tail with fin and stabilizers the P.03.10338’s tail surfaces were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. On the four fin tips, aerodynamic bodies carried landing pads while the fuselage end contained an extendable landing damper. The pilot sat in a standard Fw 190 cockpit, and the aircraft was supposed to start and land vertically from a mobile launch pad. In the case of an emergency landing, the lower stabilizers could be jettisoned. Nor internal armament was carried, instead any weaponry was to be mounted under the outer wings or the fuselage, in the form of various “Rüstsätze” packages.

 

Among the many exotic proposals to the VTOL fighter request, Kurt Tank's design appeared as one of the most simple options, and the type received the official RLM designation Ta 338. In a rush of urgency (and maybe blinded by clever Wunderwaffen marketing from Focke Wulf’s side), a series of pre-production aircraft was ordered instead of a dedicated prototype, which was to equip an Erprobungskommando (test unit, abbreviated “EK”) that would evaluate the type and develop tactics and procedures for the new fighter.

 

Fueled by a growing number of bomber raids over Germany, the “EK338” was formed as a part of JG300 in August 1944 in Schönwalde near Berlin, but it took until November 1944 that the first Ta 338 A-0 machines were delivered and made operational. These initial eight machines immediately revealed several flaws and operational problems, even though the VTOL concept basically worked and the aircraft flew well – once it was in the air and cruising at speeds exceeding 300 km/h (186 mph).

 

Beyond the many difficulties concerning the aircraft’s handling (esp. the landing was hazardous), the lack of a landing gear hampered ground mobility and servicing. Output of the BMW 803 was sufficient, even though the aircraft had clear limits concerning the take-off weight, so that ordnance was limited to only 500 kg (1.100 lb). Furthermore, the noise and the dust kicked up by starting or landing aircraft was immense, and servicing the engine or the weapons was more complicated than expected through the high position of many vital and frequently tended parts.

 

After three Ta 338 A-0 were lost in accidents until December 1944, a modified version was ordered for a second group of the EK 338. This led to the Ta 338 A-1, which now had shorter but more sharply swept tail fins that carried single wheels and an improved suspension under enlarged aerodynamic bodies.

This machine was now driven by an improved BMW 803 A-2 that delivered more power and was, with an MW-50 injection system, able to produce a temporary emergency output of 4.500 hp (3.308 kW).

 

Vertical start was further assisted by optional RATO units, mounted in racks at the rear fuselage flanks: either four Schmidding SG 34 solid fuel booster rockets, 4.9 kN (1,100 lbf) thrust each, or two larger 9.8 kN (2,203 lbf) solid fuel booster rockets, could be used. These improvements now allowed a wider range of weapons and equipment to be mounted, including underwing pods with unguided rockets against bomber pulks and also a conformal pod with two cameras for tactical reconnaissance.

 

The hazardous handling and the complicated maintenance remained the Ta 338’s Achilles heel, and the tactical benefit of VTOL operations could not outbalance these flaws. Furthermore, the Ta 338’s range remained very limited, as well as the potential firepower. Four 20mm or two 30mm cannons were deemed unsatisfactory for an interceptor of this class and power. And while bundles of unguided missiles proved to be very effective against large groups of bombers, it was more efficient to bring these weapons with simple and cheap vehicles like the Bachem Ba 349 Natter VTOL rocket fighter into target range, since these were effectively “one-shot” weapons. Once the Ta 338 fired its weapons it had to retreat unarmed.

 

In mid 1945, in the advent of defeat, further tests of the Ta 338 were stopped. I./EK338 was disbanded in March 1945 and all machines retreated from the Eastern front, while II./EK338 kept defending the Ruhrgebiet industrial complex until the Allied invasion in April 1945. Being circled by Allied forces, it was not possible to evacuate or destroy all remaining Ta 338s, so that at least two more or less intact airframes were captured by the U.S. Army and later brought to the United States for further studies.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/height on the ground: 10.40 m (34 ft 2 in)

Wingspan: 10.50 m (34 ft 5 in)

Fin span: 4:07 m (13 ft 4 in)

Wing area: 18.30 m² (196.99 ft²)

Empty weight: 11,599 lb (5,261 kg)

Loaded weight: 16,221 lb (7,358 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 16,221 lb (7,358 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× BMW 803 A-2 28-cylinder, liquid-cooled four-row radial engine,

rated at 4.100 hp (2.950 kW) and at 4.500 hp (3.308 kW) with emergency boost.

4x Schmidding SG 34 solid fuel booster rockets, 4.9 kN (1,100 lbf) thrust each, or

2x 9.8 kN (2,203 lbf) solid fuel booster rockets

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 860 km/h (534 mph)

Cruise speed: 650 km/h (403 mph)

Range: 750 km (465 ml)

Service ceiling: 43,300 ft (13,100 m)

Rate of climb: 10,820 ft/min (3,300 m/min)

Wing loading: 65.9 lb/ft² (322 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

No internal armament, any weapons were to be mounted on three hardpoints (one under the fuselage for up to 1.000 kg (2.200 lb) and two under the outer wings, 500 kg (1.100 lb) each. Total ordnance was limited to 1.000 kg (2.200 lb).

 

Various armament and equipment sets (Rüstsätze) were tested:

R1 with 4× 20 mm (.79 in) MG 151/20 cannons

R2 with 2x 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 213C cannons

R3 with 48x 73 mm (2.874 in) Henschel Hs 297 Föhn rocket shells

R4 with 66x 55 mm (2.165 in) R4M rocket shells

R5 with a single 1.000 kg (2.200 lb) bomb under the fuselage

R6 with an underfuselage pod with one Rb 20/20 and one Rb 75/30 topographic camera

  

The kit and its assembly:

This purely fictional kitbashing is a hardware tribute to a highly inspiring line drawing of a Fw 190 VTOL tailsitter – actually an idea for an operational RC model! I found the idea, that reminded a lot of the Lockheed XFV-1 ‘Salmon’ prototype, just with Fw 190 components and some adaptations, very sexy, and so I decided on short notice to follow the urge and build a 1:72 version of the so far unnamed concept.

 

What looks simple (“Heh, it’s just a Fw 190 with a different tail, isn’t it?”) turned out to become a major kitbashing. The basis was a simple Hobby Boss Fw 190 D-9, chose because of the longer tail section, and the engine would be changed, anyway. Lots of work followed, though.

 

The wings were sliced off and moved upwards on the flanks. The original tail was cut off, and the cruciform fins are two pairs of MiG-21F stabilizers (from an Academy and Hasegawa kit), outfitted with reversed Mk. 84 bombs as aerodynamic fairings that carry four small wheels (from an 1:144 T-22M bomber) on scratched struts (made from wire).

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, only a pilot figure was cramped into the seat in order to conceal the poor interior detail. The engine is a bash from a Ju 188’s BMW 801 cowling and the original Fw 190 D-9’s annular radiator as well as a part of its Jumo 213 cowling. BMW 801 exhaust stubs were inserted, too, and the propeller comes from a 1:100 VEB Plasticart Tu-20/95 bomber.

 

Since the BMW 803 had liquid cooling, radiators had to go somewhere. The annular radiator would certainly not have been enough, so I used the space in the wings that became available through the deleted Fw 190 landing gear (the wells were closed) for additional radiators in the wings’ leading edges. Again, these were scratched with styrene profiles, putty and some very fine styrene mesh.

 

As ordnance I settled for a pair of gun pods – in this case these are slipper tanks from a Hobby Boss MiG-15, blended into the wings and outfitted with hollow steel needles as barrels.

  

Painting and markings:

Several design options were possible: all NMF with some colorful markings or an overall RLM76 finish with added camouflage. But I definitively went for a semi-finished look, inspired by late WWII Fw 190 fighters.

 

For instance, the wings’ undersides were partly left in bare metal, but the rudders painted in RLM76 while the leading edges became RLM75. This color was also taken on the wings’ upper sides, with RLM82 thinly painted over. The fuselage is standard RLM76, with RLM82 and 83 on the upper side and speckles on the flanks. The engine cowling became NMF, but with a flashy ‘Hartmann Tulpe’ decoration.

 

Further highlights are the red fuselage band (from JG300 in early 1945) and the propeller spinner, which received a red tip and segments in black and white on both moving propeller parts. Large red “X”s were used as individual aircraft code – an unusual Luftwaffe practice but taken over from some Me 262s.

 

After a light black ink wash some panel shading and light weathering (e.g. exhaust soot, leaked oil, leading edges) was done, and the kit sealed under matt acrylic varnish.

  

Building this “thing” on the basis of a line drawing was real fun, even though challenging and more work than expected. I tried to stay close to the drawing, the biggest difference is the tail – the MiG-21 stabilizers were the best option (and what I had at hand as donation parts), maybe four fins from a Hawker Harrier or an LTV A-7 had been “better”, but now the aircraft looks even faster. ;)

Besides, the Ta 338 is so utterly Luft ’46 – I am curious how many people might take this for real or as a Hydra prop from a contemporary Captain America movie…

+++ 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 Waffenträger (Weapon Carrier) VTS3 “Diana” was a prototype for a wheeled tank destroyer. It was developed by Thyssen-Henschel (later Rheinmetall) in Kassel, Germany, in the late Seventies, in response to a German Army requirement for a highly mobile tank destroyer with the firepower of the Leopard 1 main battle tank then in service and about to be replaced with the more capable Leopard 2 MBT, but less complex and costly. The main mission of the Diana was light to medium territorial defense, protection of infantry units and other, lighter, elements of the cavalry as well as tactical reconnaissance. Instead of heavy armor it would rather use its good power-to-weight ratio, excellent range and cross-country ability (despite the wheeled design) for defense and a computerized fire control system to accomplish this mission.

 

In order to save development cost and time, the vehicle was heavily based on the Spähpanzer Luchs (Lynx), a new German 8x8 amphibious reconnaissance armored fighting vehicle that had just entered Bundeswehr service in 1975. The all-wheel drive Luchs made was well armored against light weapons, had a full NBC protection system and was characterized by its extremely low-noise running. The eight large low-pressure tires had run-flat properties, and, at speeds up to about 50 km/h, all four axles could be steered, giving the relatively large vehicle a surprising agility and very good off-road performance. As a special feature, the vehicle was equipped with a rear-facing driver with his own driving position (normally the radio operator), so that the vehicle could be driven at full speed into both directions – a heritage from German WWII designs, and a tactical advantage when the vehicle had to quickly retreat from tactical position after having been detected. The original Luchs weighed less than 20 tons, was fully amphibious and could surmount water obstacles quickly and independently using propellers at the rear and the fold back trim vane at the front. Its armament was relatively light, though, a 20 mm Rheinmetall MK 20 Rh 202 gun in the turret that was effective against both ground and air targets.

 

The Waffenträger “Diana” used the Luchs’ hull and dynamic components as basis, and Thyssen-Henschel solved the challenge to mount a large and heavy 105 mm L7 gun with its mount on the light chassis through a minimalistic, unmanned mount and an autoloader. Avoiding a traditional manned and heavy, armored turret, a lot of weight and internal volume that had to be protected could be saved, and crew safety was indirectly improved, too. This concept had concurrently been tested in the form of the VTS1 (“Versuchsträger Scheitellafette #1) experimental tank in 1976 for the Kampfpanzer 3 development, which eventually led to the Leopard 2 MBT (which retained a traditional turret, though).

 

For the “Diana” test vehicle, Thyssen-Henschel developed a new low-profile turret with a very small frontal area. Two crew members, the commander (on the right side) and the gunner (to the left), were seated in/under the gun mount, completely inside of the vehicle’s hull. The turret was a very innovative construction for its time, fully stabilized and mounted the proven 105mm L7 rifled cannon with a smoke discharger. Its autoloader contained 8 rounds in a carousel magazine. 16 more rounds could be carried in the hull, but they had to be manually re-loaded into the magazine, which was only externally accessible. A light, co-axial 7,62mm machine gun against soft targets was available, too, as well as eight defensive smoke grenade mortars.

 

The automated L7 had a rate of fire of ten rounds per minute and could fire four types of ammunition: a kinetic energy penetrator to destroy armored vehicles; a high explosive anti-tank round to destroy thin-skinned vehicles and provide anti-personnel fragmentation; a high explosive plastic round to destroy bunkers, machine gun and sniper positions, and create openings in walls for infantry to access; and a canister shot for use against dismounted infantry in the open or for smoke charges. The rounds to be fired could be pre-selected, so that the gun was able to automatically fire a certain ammunition sequence, but manual round selection was possible at any time, too.

 

In order to take the new turret, the Luchs hull had to be modified. Early calculations had revealed that a simple replacement of the Luchs’ turret with the new L7 mount would have unfavorably shifted the vehicle’s center of gravity up- and forward, making it very nose-heavy and hard to handle in rough terrain or at high speed, and the long barrel would have markedly overhung the front end, impairing handling further. It was also clear that the additional weight and the rise of the CoG made amphibious operations impossible - a fate that met the upgraded Luchs recce tanks in the Eighties, too, after several accidents with overturned vehicles during wading and drowned crews. With this insight the decision was made to omit the vehicle’s amphibious capability, save weight and complexity, and to modify the vehicle’s layout considerably to optimize the weight distribution.

 

Taking advantage of the fact that the Luchs already had two complete driver stations at both ends, a pair of late-production hulls were set aside in 1977 and their internal layout reversed. The engine bay was now in the vehicle’s front, the secured ammunition storage was placed next to it, behind the separate driver compartment, and the combat section with the turret mechanism was located behind it. Since the VTS3s were only prototypes, only minimal adaptations were made. This meant that the driver was now located on the right side of the vehicle, while and the now-rear-facing secondary driver/radio operator station ended up on the left side – much like a RHD vehicle – but this was easily accepted in the light of cost and time savings. As a result, the gun and its long, heavy barrel were now located above the vehicle’s hull, so that the overall weight distribution was almost neutral and overall dimensions remained compact.

 

Both test vehicles were completed in early 1978 and field trials immediately started. While the overall mobility was on par with the Luchs and the Diana’s high speed and low noise profile was highly appreciated, the armament was and remained a source of constant concern. Shooting in motion from the Diana turned out to be very problematic, and even firing from a standstill was troublesome. The gun mount and the vehicle’s complex suspension were able to "hold" the recoil of the full-fledged 105-mm tank gun, which had always been famous for its rather large muzzle energy. But when fired, even in the longitudinal plane, the vehicle body fell heavily towards the stern, so that the target was frequently lost and aiming had to be resumed – effectively negating the benefit from the autoloader’s high rate of fire and exposing the vehicle to potential target retaliation. Firing to the side was even worse. Several attempts were made to mend this flaw, but neither the addition of a muzzle brake, stronger shock absorbers and even hydro-pneumatic suspension elements did not solve the problem. In addition, the high muzzle flames and the resulting significant shockwave required the infantry to stay away from the vehicle intended to support them. The Bundeswehr also criticized the too small ammunition load, as well as the fact that the autoloader magazine could not be re-filled under armor protection, so that the vehicle had to retreat to safe areas to re-arm and/or to adapt to a new mission profile. This inherent flaw not only put the crew under the hazards of enemy fire, it also negated the vehicle’s NBC protection – a serious issue and likely Cold War scenario. Another weak point was the Diana’s weight: even though the net gain of weight compared with the Luchs was less than 3 tons after the conversion, this became another serious problem that led to the Diana’s demise: during trials the Bundeswehr considered the possibility to airlift the Diana, but its weight (even that of the Luchs, BTW) was too much for the Luftwaffe’s biggest own transport aircraft, the C-160 Transall. Even aircraft from other NATO members, e.g. the common C-130 Hercules, could hardly carry the vehicle. In theory, equipment had to be removed, including the cannon and parts of its mount.

 

Since the tactical value of the vehicle was doubtful and other light anti-tank weapons in the form of the HOT anti-tank missile had reached operational status, so that very light vehicles and even small infantry groups could now effectively fight against full-fledged enemy battle tanks from a safe distance, the Diana’s development was stopped in 1988. Both VTS3 prototypes were mothballed, stored at the Bundeswehr Munster Training Area camp and are still waiting to be revamped as historic exhibits alongside other prototypes like the Kampfpanzer 70 in the German Tank Museum located there, too.

  

Specifications:

Crew: 4 (commander, driver, gunner, radio operator/second driver)

Weight: 22.6 t

Length: 7.74 m (25 ft 4 ¼ in)

Width: 2.98 m ( 9 ft 9 in)

Height: XXX

Ground clearance: 440 mm (1 ft 4 in)

Suspension: hydraulic all-wheel drive and steering

 

Armor:

Unknown, but sufficient to withstand 14.5 mm AP rounds

 

Performance:

Speed: 90 km/h (56 mph) on roads

Operational range: 720 km (445 mi)

Power/weight: 13,3 hp/ton with petrol, 17,3 hp/ton with diesel

 

Engine:

1× Daimler Benz OM 403A turbocharged 10-cylinder 4-stroke multi-fuel engine,

delivering 300 hp with petrol, 390 hp with diesel

 

Armament:

1× 105 mm L7 rifled gun with autoloader (8 rounds ready, plus 16 in reserve)

1× co-axial 7.92 mm M3 machine gun with 2.000 rounds

Two groups of four Wegmann 76 mm smoke mortars

  

The kit and its assembly:

I have been a big Luchs fan since I witnessed one in action during a public Bundeswehr demo day when I was around 10 years old: a huge, boxy and futuristic vehicle with strange proportions, gigantic wheels, water propellers, a mind-boggling mobility and all of this utterly silent. Today you’d assume that this vehicle had an electric engine – spooky! So I always had a soft spot for it, and now it was time and a neat occasion to build a what-if model around it.

 

This fictional wheeled tank prototype model was spawned by a leftover Revell 1:72 Luchs kit, which I had bought some time ago primarily for the turret, used in a fictional post-WWII SdKfz. 234 “Puma” conversion. With just the chassis left I wondered what other use or equipment it might take, and, after several weeks with the idea in the back of my mind, I stumbled at Silesian Models over an M1128 resin conversion set for the Trumpeter M1126 “Stryker” 8x8 APC model. From this set as potential donor for a conversion the prototype idea with an unmanned turret was born.

 

Originally I just planned to mount the new turret onto the OOB hull, but when playing with the parts I found the look with an overhanging gun barrel and the bigger turret placed well forward on the hull goofy and unbalanced. I was about to shelf the idea again, until I recognized that the Luchs’ hull is almost symmetrical – the upper hull half could be easily reversed on the chassis tub (at least on the kit…), and this would allow much better proportions. From this conceptual change the build went straightforward, reversing the upper hull only took some minor PSR. The resin turret was taken mostly OOB, it only needed a scratched adapter to fit into the respective hull opening. I just added a co-axial machine gun fairing, antenna bases (from the Luchs kit, since they could, due to the long gun barrel, not be attached to the hull anymore) and smoke grenade mortars (also taken from the Luchs).

 

An unnerving challenge became the Luchs kit’s suspension and drive train – it took two days to assemble the vehicle’s underside alone! While this area is very accurate and delicate, the fact that almost EVERY lever and stabilizer is a separate piece on four(!) axles made the assembly a very slow process. Just for reference: the kit comes with three and a half sprues. A full one for the wheels (each consists of three parts, and more than another one for suspension and drivetrain!

Furthermore, the many hull surface details like tools or handles – these are more than a dozen bits and pieces – are separate, very fragile and small (tiny!), too. Cutting all these wee parts out and cleaning them was a tedious affair, too, plus painting them separately.

Otherwise the model went together well, but it’s certainly not good for quick builders and those with big fingers and/or poor sight.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was a conservative choice; it is a faithful adaptation of the Bundeswehr’s NATO standard camouflage for the European theatre of operations that was introduced in the Eighties. It was adopted by many armies to confuse potential aggressors from the East, so that observers could not easily identify a vehicle and its nationality. It consists of a green base with red-brown and black blotches, in Germany it was executed with RAL tones, namely 6031 (Bronze Green), 8027 (Leather Brown) and 9021 (Tar Black). The pattern was standardized for each vehicle type and I stuck to the official Luchs pattern, trying to adapt it to the new/bigger turret. I used Revell acrylic paints, since the authentic RAL tones are readily available in this product range (namely the tones 06, 65 and 84). The big tires were painted with Revell 09 (Anthracite).

 

Next the model was treated with a highly thinned washing with black and red-brown acrylic paint, before decals were applied, taken from the OOB sheet and without unit markings, since the Diana would represent a test vehicle. After sealing them with a thin coat of clear varnish the model was furthermore treated with lightly dry-brushed Revell 45 and 75 to emphasize edges and surface details, and the separately painted hull equipment was mounted. The following step was a cloudy treatment with watercolors (from a typical school paintbox, it’s great stuff for weathering!), simulating dust residue all over the hull. After a final protective coat with matt acrylic varnish I finally added some mineral artist pigments to the lower hull areas and created mud crusts on the wheels through light wet varnish traces into which pigments were “dusted”.

  

Basically a simple project, but the complex Luchs kit with its zillion of wee bits and pieces took time and cost some nerves. However, the result looks pretty good, and the Stryker turret blends well into the overall package. Not certain how realistic the swap of the Luchs’ internal layout would have been, but I think that the turret moved to the rear makes more sense than the original forward position? After all, the model is supposed to be a prototype, so there’s certainly room for creative freedom. And in classic Bundeswehr colors, the whole thing even looks pretty convincing.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

The English Electric Lightning was a supersonic jet fighter aircraft of the Cold War era, noted for its great speed. It was the only all-British Mach 2 fighter aircraft and the first aircraft in the world capable of supercruise. The Lightning was renowned for its capabilities as an interceptor; pilots commonly described it as "being saddled to a skyrocket". Following English Electric's integration into the unified British Aircraft Corporation, the aircraft was marketed as the BAC Lightning.

 

The Lightning was prominently used by the Royal Air Force, but also by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Singapore. The first aircraft to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, and from there the aircraft was permanently developed further.

 

The F.6 was the ultimate Lightning version to see British service. Originally, it was nearly identical to the former F.3A (which introduced a large ventral tank and new cambered wings), with the exception that it had provisions to carry 260 gal (1,180 l) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency, and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability. The Ferranti A.I.23B radar supported autonomous search, automatic target tracking, and ranging for all weapons, while the pilot attack sight provided gyroscopically derived lead angle and backup stadiametric ranging for gun firing. The radar and gunsight were collectively designated the AIRPASS: Airborne Interception Radar and Pilot Attack Sight System. Combined with the Red Top missile, the system offered a limited forward hemisphere attack capability.

 

There remained one glaring shortcoming of the late Lightning versions, though: the lack of cannon. This was finally rectified in the form of a modified ventral tank with two ADEN cannon mounted in the front. The addition of the cannon and their ammunition decreased the tank's fuel capacity from 610 gal to 535 gal (2,430 l), but the cannon made the F.6 a 'real fighter' again.

 

Singapore's Lightnings came as a bargain, as they had been taken over directly from RAF stocks. In 1967 No. 74 'Tiger' Squadron was moved to RAF Tengah in Singapore to take over the air defense role from the Gloster Javelin equipped 64 Squadron. When 74 Squadron was disbanded in September 1971, following the withdrawal of British forces from Singapore (in the course of the "East of Suez" campaign, which already started in 1968), Tengah Air Base and many other RAF sites like Seletar, Sembawang and Changi as well as the RAF air defense radar station and Bloodhound II surface-to-air missiles were handed over to the SADC, Singapore’s Air Defense Command, which was suddenly entrusted with a huge responsibility and resources.

 

Anyway, in order to fulfill its aerial defense role, Singapore's air force lacked a potent interceptor, and so it was agreed with the RAF that 74 Squadron would leave fourteen Lightnings (twelve F.6 fighters and two T.5 trainers behind, while the rest was transferred to Akrotiri, Cyprus, where the RAF aircraft were integrated into 56 Squadron.

 

The ex-RAF Lightnings, however, immediately formed the small country's quick alert interceptor backbone and were grouped into the newly established 139th Squadron, “Swifts”. The small squadron kept its base at Tengah, as a sister unit to 140th Squadron which operated the Hawker Hunter FGA.74 in the fighter role since 1971.

 

Singapore's Lightnings differed slightly from the RAF F.6: In order to minimize the maintenance costs of this specialized aircraft, the SADC decided to drop the Red Top missile armament. The Red Top gave all-weather capability, but operating this standalone system for just a dozen of aircraft was deemed cost-inefficient. Keeping the high-performance Lightnings airworthy was already costly and demanding enough.

 

As a cost-effective measure, all SADC Lightnings were modified to carry four AIM-9B and later E Sidewinder AAMs on special, Y-shaped pylons, not unlike those used on the US Navy's F-8 Crusader. In order to enhance all-weather capability, an AAS-15 IRST sensor was added, located in a fairing in front of the wind shield. Its electronics used the space of the omitted, fuselage-mounted cannons of the F.6 variant.

 

Long range and loitering time were only of secondary relevance, so that the Singaporean Lightnings typically carried two 30 mm ADEN cannons with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage, which reduced the internal fuel capacity slightly but made the Lightning a true close combat fighter with high agility, speed and rate of climb. Since the RSAF interceptors would only engage in combat after direct visual contact and target identification, the Sidewinders' short range was no operational problem - and because that missile type was also in use with RSAF's Hawker Hunters, this solution was very cost-efficient.

 

The F.6's ability to carry the overwing ferry tanks (the so-called 'Overburgers') was retained, though, as well as the refueling probe and, and with its modified/updated avionics the RSAF Lightnings received the local designations of F.6S and T.5S. They were exclusively used in the interceptor role and retained their natural metal finish all though their service career.

 

In 1975, the SADC was eventually renamed into ‘Republic of Singapore Air Force’ (RSAF), and the aircraft received appropriate markings.

 

The RSAF Lightnings saw an uneventful career. One aircraft was lost due to hydraulic failure in August 1979 (the pilot ejected safely), and when in 1983 RSAF's F-5S fighters took over the duties of airborne interception from the Royal Australian Air Force's Mirage IIIOs detachment stationed at Tengah, all remaining RSAF Lightnings were retired and phased out of service in March 1984 and scrapped. The type's global career did not last much longer: the last RAF Lightnings were retired in 1988 and replaced by the Panavia Tornado ADV.

  

BAE Lightning F.6S general characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 55 ft 3 in (16.8 m)

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.6 m)

Height: 19 ft 7 in (5.97 m)

Wing area: 474.5 ft² (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14.092 kg)

Max. take-off weight: 45,750 lb (20.752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojets with 12,530 lbf (55.74 kN) dry thrust each and 16,000 lbf (71.17 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 (1.300 mph/2.100 km/h) at 36.000 ft.

Range: 850 mi (1.370 km) Supersonic intercept radius: 155 mi (250 km)

Ferry range: 920 mi (800 NM/ 1.660 km) 1,270 mi (1.100 NM/ 2.040 km) with ferry tanks

Service ceiling: 54.000 ft (16.000 m); zoom ceiling >70.000 ft

Rate of climb: 20.000 ft/min (100 m/s)

Wing loading: 76 lb/ft² (370 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.78

 

Armament:

2× under-fuselage hardpoints for mounting air-to-air missiles (2 or 4 AIM-9 Sidewinder)

Optional, but typically fitted: 2× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannons with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage, reducing the ventral tank's fuel capacity from 610 gal to 535 gal (2,430 l)

2× overwing pylon stations for 260 gal ferry tanks

    

The kit and its assembly

The inspiration to this whiffy Lightning came through fellow user Nick at whatifmodelers.com (credits go to him), who brought up the idea of EE/BAC Lightnings in Singapore use: such a small country would be the ideal user of this fast interceptor with its limited range. I found the idea very convincing and plausible, and since I like the Lightning and its unique design very much, I (too) had to make one for the 2013 group build "Asiarama" - even if a respective model would potentially be built twice. But it's always fun to see how the same theme is interpreted by different modelers, I am looking forward to my creation's sister ship.

 

The kit is the Matchbox Lightning F.2A/F.6 (PK-114) from 1976, and only little was changed. Fit is O.K., building the model poses no real problems. But the kit needs some putty work at the fuselage seams, and the many raised panel lines (esp. at the belly tank) and other relatively fine and many details for a Matchbox kit make sanding rather hazardous. Nevertheless, it's a solid kit. A bit toy-like, yes, but good value for the relatively little money. What's saved might be well invested into an extra decal sheet (see below).

 

Internal mods include some added details inside of the cockpit and the landing gear wells, but these were just enhancements to the original parts. The Avons' afterburners were simulated with implanted sprocket wheels from a 1:72 Panzer IV - not intended to be realistic at all, but IMO better than the kit's original, plain end caps!

 

Externally…

· the flaps were lowered

· some antennae and a finer pitot added

· about a dozen small air intakes/outlets were added (cut from styrene) or drilled open

· the IRST sensor fairing added, sculpted from a simple piece of sprue

· a pair of 30mm barrels mounted in the lower fuselage (hollow steel needles)

· the scratch-built quadruple Sidewinder rails are worth mentioning

 

The AIM-9E missiles come from the scrap heap, I was lucky to find a matching set of four. The optional overwing fuel tanks were not fitted, as this was supposed to become a "standard RSAF aircraft". I also did not opt for (popular) weapons mounted above the wings, since this would have called for modifications of the F.6 which did not appear worthwhile to me in context with the envisaged RSAF use. Switching to four Sidewinders on the fuselage hardpoints was IMHO enough.

  

Painting and markings

More effort went into this project part. The end of RAF's 74 Squadron at Tengah and the return of the Lightnings to Europe opened a nice historical window for my whif. Since the Tiger Squadron's aircraft sported a natural metal finish, partly with black fins (accidentally, the Matchbox kit offers just the correct decal/painting option), I decided that the RSAF would keep their aircraft this way: without camouflage, just RSAF markings, with some bold and highly visible colors added.

A SEA scheme (as on the RSAF Hunters, Strikemasters of Skyhawks) would have been another serious option and certainly look weird on a Lightning, as well as a three-tone gray wraparound low-viz scheme as used on the F-5E/S fighters, plausible in the 80ies onwards.

 

Testors Aluminum Metallizer was used as basic color, but several other shades including Steel and Titanium Metallizer, Testors normal Aluminum enamel paint, Humbrol 11 and 56 as well as Revell Aqua Color Aluminum were used for selected surface portions or panels all around the hull.

 

The spine including the cockpit frame was painted black. Using RSAF's 140 Squadron's colors as a benchmark, the fin received a checkered decoration in black and red, reminiscent of RAF 56 Squadron Lightnings. This was created through a black, painted base, onto which decals - every red field was cut from a red surface sheet from TL Modellbau - were transferred. Sounds horrible, but it was easier and more exact than expected. A very convenient solution with sharp edges and good contrast. A red trim line, 1mm wide, was added as a decal along the spine in a similar fashion.

 

The squadron emblem on the Lightning's nose was created through the same scratch method: from colored 1.5mm wide stripes, 3mm pieces were cut and applied one by one to form the checkered bar. The swift emblem comes from a 1:48 sheet for French WWI aircraft, made by Peddinghaus Decals from Germany. The overall look was supposed to be similar to the (real) 140 Squadron badge.

 

As a consequence, this created a logical problem: where to put the national roundel? Lightnings usually wore them on the nose, but unlike RAF style (where a bar was added around the roundel), I used RSAF Hunters as benchmark.

The RSAF roundels were a challenge. In order not to cramp the nose section too much I decided to place the roundels behind the wings. Not the must prominent position, but plausible. I originally wanted to use decals from the current 1:72 Airfix BAC Strikemaster kit, but they turned out to be too small.

After long search I was happy to find a 1:48 aftermarket decal sheet from Morgan Decals for an A-4S, with full color yin-yang roundels - in Canada! It took three weeks to wait for these parts, though, even though work had to wait for this final but vital detail !

 

As a side not, AFAIK any RSAF aircraft only carried and carries these roundels on the fuselage sides, not on the wings' upper or lower surfaces? It leaves the model a bit naked, so I decided to add 'RSAF' letters and the tactical code '237' to the wings' upper and lower sides. But the fin is surely bold enough to compensate ;)

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Medium Sea Gray (Humbrol 27), the landing gear and the wells in a mix of Humbrol 56 and 34, for a light gray with a metallic shimmer.

 

Other details include the white area behind the cockpit, which contained an AVPIN/isopropyl nitrate tank for the Lightning's start engine. Hazardous stuff - the light color was to prevent excessive heating in the sun, a common detail for Lightnings used in Cyprus. Another piece that took some effort was the shaggy nose cone, which was painted in a mix of Humbrol 56 and 86 and received some serious dry painting in light gray and ochre.

 

Stencils etc. were taken from an extensive aftermarket sheet for Lightnings from Xtradecal (X72096). The Matchbox decal sheet of PK-114 just offers the ejection seat warning triangles - that's all! The later T.55 kit is much better in this regard, but still far from being complete.

 

After decal application and to enhance the metallic look, the kit received a careful rubbing with finely grinded graphite, which, as a side effect, also emphasized the raised panel lines. A little dry painting was done around some exhaust openings, but nothing to make the aircraft look really old. This is supposed to be a bright and well-maintained interceptor!

 

Finally, the kit received a thin coat with glossy acrylic varnish, the spine and fin received a semi-matt coat and the black glare shield in front of the cockpit became matt.

   

A pretty straightforward build for the Asiarama group build, and with best regards and credits to Nick who came up with the original idea. Most work went into the decals and the NMF finish. I like the bold colors, and despite being flamboyant, they do not make the Lightning look too far out of place?

 

As a final note: XR773 never ended up in Singapore service, just like any BAC Lightning. In real life, the aircraft (first flight was in February 1966 with Roly Beamont at the controls) was transferred from 74 Squadron at RAF Tengah to Akrotiri in late 1971 and had a pretty long life, further serving with 56, 5 and 11 Squadrons as well as the Lightning Training Flight. And even then it’s life was far from over: XR773 is one of the Lightning survivors; in South Africa it flew in private hands as ZU-BEW until 2010, when it was grounded and the airframe put up to sale.

+++ 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 North American FJ-4 Fury was a swept-wing carrier-capable fighter-bomber for the United States Navy and Marine Corps. The final development in a lineage that included the Air Force's F-86 Sabre, the FJ-4 shared its general layout and engine with the earlier FJ-3, but, compared to that of the FJ-3, the FJ-4's new wing was much thinner, with a six percent thickness-to-chord ratio, and featured skin panels milled from solid alloy plates. It also had an increased area and tapered more sharply towards the tips. Slight camber behind the leading edge improved low speed characteristics. The main landing gear design had to be considerably modified to fold wheel and strut within the contours of the new wing. The track of the main wheels was increased, and because they were closer to the center of gravity, there was less weight on the nosewheel. Wing folding was limited to the outer wing panels.

 

The FJ-4 was intended as an all-weather interceptor, a role that required considerable range on internal fuel. The FJ-4 had 50% more fuel capacity than the FJ-3 and was lightened by omitting armor and reducing ammunition capacity. The new wing was "wet"; that is, it provided for integral fuel tankage. The fuselage was deepened to add more fuel and had a distinctive "razorback" rear deck. A modified cockpit made the pilot more comfortable during the longer missions. The tail surfaces were also extensively modified, had a thinner profile and featured an extended, taller fin. The overall changes resulted in an aircraft that had little in common with the earlier models, although a family resemblance was still present.

 

The FJ-4 was developed into a family of aircraft. Of the original order for 221 FJ-4 day fighters, the last 71 were modified into the FJ-4B fighter-bomber version. This had a stronger wing with six instead of four underwing stations and stronger landing gear. Additional aerodynamic brakes under the aft fuselage made landing safer by allowing pilots to use higher thrust settings and were also useful for dive attacks. External load was doubled. The most important characteristic of the FJ-4B was, since the Navy was eager to maintain a nuclear role in its rivalry with the Air Force, that it was capable of carrying a nuclear weapon on the inboard port station. For the delivery of nuclear weapons, the FJ-4B was equipped with the Low-Altitude Bombing System (LABS), and with this capability it replaced the carrier-based A-3 Skywarrior bombers, which were not suited well for the new low-level approach tactics.

 

In April 1956, the Navy ordered 151 more FJ-4Bs, 10 US Navy squadrons became equipped with the FJ-4B, and the type was also flown by three Marine squadrons. At the same time, the Navy requested a carrier-borne fighter with all-weather capability, radar-guided missiles and a higher performance. This new type was to replace several 1st generation US Navy jets, including the ponderous and heavy Douglas F3D Skyknight, the lackluster Vought F7U as well as the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar. This requirement led to the Douglas F4D Skyray and North American’s FJ-5, another thorough modification of the Fury’s basic design and its eventual final evolution stage.

 

North American’s FJ-5 was designed with compact dimensions in mind, so that the type could be operated on older Essex Class carriers, which offered rather limited storage and lift space. At the time of the FJ-5’s conception, several of these carriers were still in service – and this argument led to an order for the FJ-5 in addition to the F4D.

 

For the FJ-5, the FJ-4’s aerodynamic surfaces were retained, but the fuselage had to be modified considerably in order to accept an APQ-50A radar with a parabolic 24 inches diameter antenna in the nose. The radome was placed above the air intake, similar to the F-86D, and coupled with an Aero 13F fire-control system, which together provided full all-weather capability and information on automatic firing of rockets.

A deeper rear fuselage became necessary, too, because the FJ-5 was powered by a reheated J65-W-18 engine (a development of the Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet, optimized for a naval environment), which delivered up to 10,500 lbf (47 kN) at full power instead of the FJ-4’s original 7,700 lbf (34 kN). This upgrade had, limited by the airframe’s aerodynamics, only marginal impact on the aircraft’s top speed, but the extra power almost doubled its initial rate of climb, slightly raised the service ceiling and markedly improved acceleration and carrier operations handling through a better response to throttle input and a higher margin of power reserves.

 

Internal armament still consisted of four 20mm cannon. These had to be placed lower in the nose now, flanking the air intake underneath the radome. The FJ-4B’s six underwing hardpoints were retained and could carry AIM-9 Sidewinders (both the IR-guided AIM-9B as well as the Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH) AIM-9C) as well as the new radar-guided medium-range AIM-7C Sparrow, even though the latter only on the outer pylons, limiting their number to four. Up to six pods with nineteen unguided 70 mm/2.75” unguided Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rocket (Mighty Mouse FFARs) were another armament option.

 

Beyond these air-to-air weapons, a wide range of other ordnance could be carried. This included the AGM-12 “Bullpup” guided missile (which necessitated a guidance pod on the right inner wing hardpoint), bombs or napalm tanks of up to 1.000 lb caliber, missile pods, drop tanks and ECM pods. The FJ-4B’s strike capabilities were mostly retained, even though the dedicated fighter lost the ability to carry and deliver nuclear weapons in order to save weight and internal space for the radar equipment.

 

The first FJ-5, a converted early FJ-4, made its maiden flight in April 1958. After a short and successful test phase, the type was quickly put into production and introduced to service with US Navy and US Marine Corps units. The new fighter was quickly nicknamed “Fury Dog” by its crews, a reminiscence of the USAF’s F-86D “Sabre Dog” and its characteristic nose section, even though the FJ-5 was officially still just called “Fury”, like its many quite different predecessors.

 

With the new unified designation system adopted in 1962, the FJ-4 became the F-1E, the FJ-4B the AF-1E and the FJ-5 the F-1F. From the prolific Fury family, only the FJ-5/F-1F became involved in a hot conflict: in late 1966, the USMC deployed F-1Fs to Vietnam, where they primarily flew escort and top cover missions for fighter bombers (esp. A-4 Skyhawks) from Da Nang AB, South Vietnam, plus occasional close air support missions (CAS) on their own. The Marines’ F-1Fs remained in Vietnam until 1970, with a single air-to-air victory (a North-Vietnamese MiG-17 was shot down with a Sidewinder missile), no losses and only one aircraft seriously damaged by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) fire.

 

After this frontline experience, a radar upgrade with an AN/APQ-124 was briefly considered but never carried out, since the F-1F showed the age of the original Fifties design – the type already lacked overall performance for an all-weather fighter that could effectively engage supersonic bomber targets or low flying attack aircraft. However, the aircraft was still popular because of its ruggedness, good handling characteristics and compact dimensions.

Other upgrades that would improve the F-1F’s strike capability, e. g. additional avionics to deploy the AGM-62 Walleye glide bomb or the new AGM-65 Maverick, esp. the USMC’s laser-guided AGM-65E variant, were also rejected, because more capable types for both interceptor and attack roles, namely the Mach 2 Douglas F-4 Phantom II and the LTV A-7 Corsair II, had been introduced in the meantime.

Another factor that denied any updates were military budget cuts. Furthermore, the contemporary F-8 Crusader offered a better performance and was therefore selected in favor of the F-1F to be updated to the H-L variants. In the wake of this decision, all F-1Fs still in Navy service were, together with the decommission of the last Essex Class carriers, in 1975 handed over to the USMC in order to purge the Navy’s inventory and simplify maintenance and logistics.

 

FJ-4 and FJ-4B Fury fighter bombers served with United States Naval Reserve units until the late 1960s, while the F-1F soldiered on with the USMC until the early Eighties, even though only in reserve units. A considerable number had the heavy radar equipment removed and replaced by ballast in the late Seventies, and they were used as fighter-bombers, for dissimilar air combat training (simulating Soviet fighter types like the MiG-17 and -19), as high-speed target tugs or as in-flight refueling tankers, since the FJ-5 inherited this capability from the FJ-4, with up to two buddy packs under the wings. A few machines survived long enough to receive a new low-visibility livery.

 

However, even in the USMC reserve units, the FJ-5 was soon replaced by A-4 Skyhawks, due to the age of the airframes and further fleet reduction measures. The last F-1F was retired in 1982, ending the long career of North American’s F-86 design in US service.

 

A total of 1,196 Furies of all variants were received by the Navy and Marine Corps over the course of its production life, including 152 FJ-4s, 222 FJ-4Bs and 102 FJ-5s.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 40 ft 3 in (12.27 m)

Wingspan: 39 ft 1 in (11.9 m)

Height: 13 ft 11 in (4.2 m)

Wing area: 338.66 ft² (31.46 m²)

Empty weight: 13,518 lb (6,132 kg)

Gross weight: 19,975 lb (9,060 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 25,880 lb (11,750 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Wright J65-W-18 turbojet with 7,400 lbf (32.9 kN) dry thrust

and 10,500 lbf (46.7 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 708 mph (1,139 km/h, 615 kn) at sea level,

737 mph (1,188 km/h/Mach 0.96) at height

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

Service ceiling: 49,750 ft (15,163 m)

Rate of climb: 12,150 ft/min (61.7 m/s)

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

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (0.787 in) Colt Mk 12 cannon (144 RPG, 578 rounds in total)

6× underwing hardpoints for 3,000 lb (1,400 kg) of ordnance, including AIM-9 and AIM-7 missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

A project I had on the agenda for a long time. But, due to the major surgeries involved, I have been pushing it away – until the “In the navy” group build at whatifmolders.com came along in early 2020. So I collected my courage, dusted off the donor kits that had already been stashed away for years, and eventually started work.

 

The original inspiration was the F-8 Crusader’s career: I really like the look of the late RF-8s, which were kept long enough in service to receive the Eighties’ Low-Viz USN “Compass Ghost” livery. This looks cool, but also a little wrong. And what if the FJ-4B had been kept in service long enough to receive a similar treatment…?

 

In order to justify a career extension, I made up an all-weather development of the FJ-4B with a radar and a more powerful engine, a kind of light alternative to the Vought A-7. A plausible solution was a mix of FJ-4B and F-86D parts – this sounds easy, but both aircraft and their respective model kits actually have only VERY little in common.

 

At its core, the FJ-5 model is a kitbashing of parts from an Emhar FJ-4B (Revell re-boxing) and an Airfix F-86D. The FJ-4B provided the raised cockpit section with the canopy, spine and fin in the form of a complete transplant, which furthermore had to be extended by about 1cm/0.5” because the F-86D is longer than the Fury. The FJ-4B also provided its wings, stabilizers and the landing gear. The Fury’s ventral arrester hook section, a separate part, was also transferred into the F-86D’s lower rear fuselage, under the openings for the air brakes.

For a more lively look, the (thick!) Fury canopy was sawed into two pieces for open display and the flaps were lowered, too.

 

The cockpit was taken from the Airfix kit, since it would fit well into the lower fuselage and it looked much better than their respective counterparts from the relatively basic Emhar kit, which just comes with a narrow board with a strange, bulky seat-thing. As an extra, the cockpit received side consoles, a scratched gunsight and a different ejection seat that raised the pilot’s position into the Fury’s higher canopy.

 

Since the F-1F was supposed to be a fighter, still equipped with the radar set, I retained the OOB pylons from the Fury with its four launch rails. For an aircraft late in the career, I gave it a reduced ordnance, though, just a pair of drop tanks (left over from a Matchbox F3D Skyknight; I wanted something more slender than the stubby OOB drop tanks from the Emhar Fury kit), plus a better Sidewinder training round (hence its blue body) and a single red ACMI data pod on the outer pylons, as an aerial combat training outfit and nice color highlights on the otherwise dull/grey aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, the idea for livery was a vintage aircraft in modern, subdued markings. So I adapted the early USN Compass Ghost scheme, and the F-1F received a two-tone livery in FS 36320 and 36375 (Dark and Light Compass Ghost Grey, Humbrol 128 and 127, respectively) with a high, wavy waterline and a light fin. In front of the cockpit, a slightly darker anti-glare panel in Humbrol 145 (FS 35237) was added, inspired by early USN F-14s in Compass Ghost camouflage.

The radome was painted with Humbrol 156, for a slightly darker/different shade of grey than the aircraft’s upper surfaces – I considered a black or a beige (unpainted glass fiber) radome first, but that would have been a very harsh contrast to the rest.

 

The landing gear as well as the air intake duct were painted glossy white (Humbrol 22), the cockpit became medium grey (Humbrol 140, Dark Gull Gray). The inside of the air brakes as well es the edges of the flaps, normally concealed when they are retracted, were painted in bright red (Humbrol 174). The same tone was also used to highlight the edges of the land gear covers.

 

The grey leading edges on the wings the stabilizers were created with decal sheet strips (generic material from TL Modellbau), the gun blast plates were made with silver decal material.

In order to give the model a worn look, I applied a black ink wash, an overall, light treatment with graphite and some post shading. Some extra graphite was applied around the exhaust and the gun nozzles.

 

The markings were taken for an USMC A-4E/F from a Revell kit (which turned out to be a bit bluish). I wanted a consequent dull/toned-down look, typical for early Compass Ghost aircraft. Later, colored highlights, roundels and squadron markings crept back onto the aircraft, but in the early Eighties many USN/USMC machines were consequently finished in a grey-in-grey livery.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and the ordnance added.

  

Well, the end result looks simple, but creating this kitbashed Fury all-weather fighter was pretty demanding. Even though both the Fury and the F-86D are based on the same aircraft, they are completely different, and the same is also true for the model kits. It took major surgeries and body sculpting to weld the parts together. But I am quite happy with the outcome, the fictional F-1F looks pretty conclusive and natural, also in the (for this aircraft) unusual low-viz livery.

 

Center Healthy and balanced Diet Idea

 

Weight control and regular physical exercise are actually vital for maintaining your heart in shape-- yet the food items you eat might matter equally very much. A heart-healthy nutrition can lower your threat of heart problem or stroke by 80 %. By recognizing which foods items together with the techniques of cooking are actually healthiest for your center, you might be actually capable to prevent or handle cardiovascular disease and hypertension, and take higher management over the top quality as well as length of your lifestyle.

In This Write-up:.

 

You can easily protect against cardiovascular disease.

Minimize out filled and also trans fats.

Choose foods items that decrease cholesterol levels.

Avoid salt and also processed foods.

Rekindle residence food preparation.

Focus on high-fiber foods items.

Control section measurements-- and also your weight.

 

Print this! Ordinary Text SizeLarger Content SizeLargest Words Measurements.

You can easily go through measures to avoid center illness.

 

Heart problem might be actually the leading great of guys and also ladies, however that doesn't imply you can not defend on your own. Aside from exercise, being actually careful pertaining to just what you consume-- as well as just what you do not eat-- can assist you reduced blood cholesterol, control blood tension and blood glucose degrees, together with the sustain a healthy mass. If you've presently been actually recognized using heart problem or perhaps have high cholesterol levels or blood stress, a heart-smart diet plan can aid you much better take care of these disorders, lowering your hazard for heart attack.

 

Improving your eating plan is a significant action towards avoiding cardiovascular disease, however you may sense uncertain where to start. Enjoy an appearance at the large photo: your total consuming designs are more vital compared to consuming over one-on-one foods. No single food items could make you amazingly healthy and balanced, therefore your goal could be to combine a selection of well-balanced foods items cooked in healthy and balanced techniques in to your nutrition, together with the create these routines your new lifestyle.

Consume Far more.

 

Consume Much less.

 

Well-balanced fatty tissues: raw nuts, tawny oil, fish oils, flax seeds, or perhaps avocados.

 

Trans fatty tissues from somewhat hydrogenated or deep-fried foods; filled fatty tissues through whole-fat dairy products or reddish meat.

 

Nutrients: vibrant fruits as well as vegetables-- fresh or perhaps frozen, well prepared without butter.

 

Packaged foods of any kind, primarily those extreme in salt.

 

Nutrient: grains, breadstuffs, and also pasta created from whole pellets or vegetables.

 

White or even egg cell breads, granola-type cereals, fine-tuned pastas or even rice.

 

Omega 3 together with the protein: fish together with the seafood, poultry.

 

Reddish food, bacon, sausage, seared chicken.

 

Calcium mineral together with the healthy protein: Egg whites, egg cell replacements, skim or perhaps 1 % milk, nonfat or perhaps low-fat cheeses or even yogurt.

 

Egg cell yolk sacs, whole or 2 percent milk, entire milk goods like cheese or natural yogurt.

Heart healthy and balanced diet regimen tips: Reduce saturated and trans fats.

 

Of all the achievable improvements you could make to your eating plan, confining saturated fatty tissues and removing trans fatty tissues entirely is actually perhaps the best significant. Both kinds of fatty tissue raise your LDL, or perhaps "bad" blood cholesterol degree, which can raise your hazard for cardiovascular disease and stroke. The good news is, there are actually several techniques to regulate how very much filled and also trans fatty tissues you consume. Try to keep these causes in mind since you create and prepare meals options-- and also find out tips on how to avoid all of them.

 

Reduce the volume of strong fatty tissues like butter, margarine, or reducing you incorporate to food items when food preparation or serving. You can additionally restrict strong fatty tissue by trimming down fatty tissue off your meat or even selecting leaner proteins.

Swap out high-fat meals for their lower-fat counterparts. Top your baked potato, for example, using salsa or perhaps low-fat yogurt somewhat compared to butter, or utilize low-sugar fruit array on your toast rather of margarine.

Be actually label-savvy. Inspect food items marks on any sort of prepared foods. Many snacks, perhaps even those labeled "minimized fat," might be actually made along with oils containing trans fatty tissues. One clue that a food gets some trans fatty tissue is the expression "somewhat hydrogenated." As well as appear for hidden fat; refried beans might include lard, or perhaps breakfast cereals could possess substantial volumes of fat.

Replace your practices. The most effective method to steer clear of filled or trans fats is actually to modify your way of living strategies. Rather than flakes, snack on fruit or vegetables. Difficulty your own self to prepare along with a limited amount of butter. At restaurants, ask that dressings or even dressings be applied the side-- or ended altogether.

 

Not all fats misbehave for your heart.

 

While filled and trans fats are actually obstructions to a healthy soul, unsaturated fats are actually essential permanently health. You simply need to recognize the difference. "Great" fats consist of:.

 

Omega 3 Fatty Acids. Greasy fish like fish, trout, or even herring together with the flax seed, canola oil, and also walnuts all contain polyunsaturated fats that are crucial for the physical body.

Omega 6 Fatty Acids. Vegetable oils, soy nuts, together with the several sorts of seeds all contain healthy fatty tissues.

Monounsaturated fatty tissues. Almonds, cashews, peanuts, pecans, as well as butters made because of these nuts, in addition to avocadoes, are all wonderful origins of "excellent" fatty tissue.

 

Heart well-balanced diet plan pointers: Decide on foods items that decrease cholesterol.

 

Unwell cholesterol levels boost your danger for heart problem, so always keeping yours reduced is crucial to a healthier core. Your eating plan is main to managing your cholesterol. Some meals can in fact lower your cholesterol levels, while others simply create matters worse.

 

Foods having high levels of saturated fats or trans fats-- such as spud chips together with the packaged cookies-- can easily increase your cholesterol levels a lot a lot more drastically compared to blood cholesterol- having foods such since eggs. Filled fat together with the trans fat each rise LDL ("poor") blood cholesterol.

Pick meals rich in unsaturated fatty tissues, fiber, and healthy protein. The best foods for reducing cholesterol levels are actually slow cooked oatmeal, fish, walnuts (and additional nuts), olive oil, as well as foods fortified along with sterols or even stanols-- materials located in plants that assist block the absorption of cholesterol.

Bear in mind that labels could be deceiving. Browsing meals tags could frequently be actually complexed because packaged foods with marks like "cholesterol levels free" or even "reasonable cholesterol" typically aren't always heart-healthy; they might perhaps even have cholesterol that's heart-risky. Stick to nitty-gritties whenever achievable: fruit, veggies, nuts, and lean healthy proteins.

 

Reducing your cholesterol along with fish or perhaps fish oil supplements.

 

By incorporating fish like or herring to your diet regimen two times a full week, you could substantially reduce your blood cholesterol, together with the thereby your threat for cardiovascular system attack. Fish contain omega-3 fatty acids, which operate like superheroes, performing great acts for your heart-- and your entire body.

Cardiovascular system well-balanced diet regimen ideas: Stay away from salt and processed foods items.

 

Minimizing the salt in your food is a big component of a heart-healthy diet. The American Cardiovascular system Organization highly recommends no even more than concerning a teaspoon of salt a time for a grownup.

 

Lessen tinned or procedured foods. Much of the sodium you consume comes through tinned or processed foods items like soups or frozen suppers-- also chicken or even various meats usually have actually sodium incorporated during the course of processing. Consuming fresh foods, trying to find unsalted foods, and also making your personal soups or even soups could greatly lessen your sodium intake.

Chef at house, utilizing seasonings for flavor. Make usage of the a lot of tasty choices to salt.

Substitute lowered salt models, or even sodium alternatives. Choose your dressings as well as packaged foods carefully, searching for meals tagged sodium free of cost, reduced salt, or even saltless. Better yet, make use of wholesome ingredients and also prepare without salt.

 

The SPRINKLE eating plan for decreasing blood tension.

 

The Dietary Approaches to Quit Hypertension, or even DASH diet regimen, is actually a particularly fashioned eating program to help you lower your blood pressure, which is actually a major root cause of hypertension and also stroke. To learn far more, download the pamphlet through the National Heart, Breathing, and Blood Principle discovered in the Funds as well as References section beneath.

Cardiovascular system healthy and balanced diet regimen suggestions: Revive home food preparation.

 

It's very challenging to eat right for your heart when you're eating out a great deal, purchasing in, or consuming microwave dinners and also other procedured foods. Fortunately is that you could learn to create quick, core meals in your home. This's much easier and much less taxing than you might think.

Heart-healthy grocery store buying and also keeping.

 

Developing a heart-friendly nutrition begins along with equipping your fridge along with healthy and balanced together with the obtainable foods items. Prep a list before you go to the outlet or even agriculturalist's market, together with the leave a little precious time after your vacation to establish on your own game success during the full week.

Check out marks.

 

While scanning the aisles of a supermarket in the UNITED STATE, search for foods items featuring the American Soul Association's heart-check scar to find heart-healthy foods. This company logo signifies that the food items has actually been accredited to fulfill the United states Soul Association's criteria for saturated fatty tissue together with the blood cholesterol. In Australia, seek the Center Foundation Tick.

 

American Center Affiliation.

 

United states Center Affiliation.

 

Australian Soul Groundwork.

 

Australian Soul Foundation.

 

Make well-balanced substitutions. Decide on substitutions like 1 % or even shaved milk rather of entire milk, limp margarine for butter, and also lean foods like chick together with the fish in area of ribs or area food. These replacements can easily conserve you a whole day's well worth of saturated fat.

Make foods items ready-to-eat. You are actually even more probably to remain heart-healthy when you make healthy meals simple to get hold of throughout your swamped week. When you come residence through grocery buying, cut up vegetables and also fruits and save all of them in the refrigerator, ready for the upcoming food or perhaps when you are seeking a ready-to-eat treat.

Usage your refrigerator. Make healthy and balanced consuming simpler by cold heart-healthy meals in various sections. Freeze fruits for example, bananas, grapes, as well as orange slices to make all of them more fun to eat for little ones. Beware using part dimensions: the highly recommended providing of prepared food is regarding the size of a deck of cards, while an offering of noodles needs to be actually regarding the dimension of a ball.

 

Heart-healthy food preparation recommendations.

Healthy and balanced Recipes Could Save Funds.

 

When you prep and prepare meals in your home, you get far better management over the dietary content and also the overall healthfulness of the meals you eat. An extrad bonus offer: you can easily additionally save funds.

 

Produce a public library of heart-healthy dishes. Stockpile on heart-healthy recipe books and also formulas for food preparation concepts. The web is actually complete of food blogs together with the websites alloted to well-balanced cooking methods as well as formulas, as well as a community library may be an excellent origin for recipe books.

Use heart-healthy cooking methods. Equally as vital as deciding on healthy meals at the food store is actually how you cook those foods items into healthy foods. Make use of low-fat procedures: you can easily cook, broil, microwave, roast, heavy steam, poach, softly rouse fry, or even sauté-- utilizing a percentage of veggie or even tawny oil, minimized salt broth, together with the spices.

Prepare merely twice a week and also make food for the entire week. When you're cooking healthful foods, produce extra assistings. Store since meals in multiple-use vessels-- or straight on plates-- for uncomplicated reheating and ready-to-eat food the rest of the full week. Cooking well-balanced food ahead through this is maybe the best convenient, money-saving, and also heart-saving approach accessible.

 

Heart well-balanced eating plan tips: Concentrate on high-fiber foods items.

 

A diet regimen high in fiber can reduce "poor" cholesterol and also give nutrients that can assist guard from heart disease. Through filling out on entire grains, veggies, as well as fruits, you can easily establish most of the nutrient you'll require, which indicates you'll also be reducing your danger of cardiovascular disease.

Choose entire grains.

 

Processed or perhaps procedured foods are actually lesser in nutrient information, therefore create whole grains an integral aspect of your diet regimen. There are several straightforward techniques to add whole grains to your foods.

 

Breakfast more efficiently. For breakfast pick a high-fiber breakfast grain-- one along with 5 or even more grams of nutrient each offering. Or incorporate a handful of tablespoons of unrefined wheat or grain bran to your beloved grain.

Attempt a brand-new grain. Tryout along with wild rice, wild rice, barley, whole-wheat noodles, and also bulgur. These alternatives are greater in fiber than their additional mainstream counterparts-- together with the you could discover you love their preferences.

Majority your baking. When baking in the house, alternative whole-grain flour for fifty percent or even all of the white flour, given that whole-grain flour is heavier than white colored flour. In yeast breadstuffs, use a little bit far more yeast or even let the dough growth longer. Try including crushed wheat bran grain or even unrefined grain bran to buns, cakes, together with the desserts.

Extra flaxseed. Flaxseeds are actually minor brownish seeds that are high in fiber and also omega-3 fatty acids, which may lower your absolute blood cholesterol. You may grind the seeds in a coffee mill or mixer and stir a tsp of all of them in to yogurt, applesauce, or perhaps in demand cereal.

 

Eat a variety of vegetables and fruits.

 

Many vegetables together with the fruits are reduced in gram calories as well as higher in fiber, making all of them center healthy. You can easily utilize several of the observing methods to create consuming fruits together with the veggies aspect of your diet daily.

 

Try to keep fruit and veggies at your fingertips. Cleaning as well as slashed fruit and veggies and also place them in your refrigerator for healthy and also speedy snacks. Select recipes that feature these high-fiber elements, like veggie stir-fries or fruit salad.

Integrate veggies into your food preparation. Include pre-cut fresh or even frozen veggies to sauces and also soups. Mix cut frosted broccoli into prepared pastas sauce or even toss fresh infant carrots into mishmashes.

Consume more peas, beans, together with the lentils. Extra renal grains to prerecorded soup or even a green salad.

Make snacks count. Wholesome as well as dried fruit, raw vegetables, and also whole-grain crackers are all excellent ways to incorporate fiber at snack precious time. A random handful of nuts is additionally a well-balanced, high-fiber treat.

 

Center healthy diet recommendations: Control section size-- and your mass.

 

Gaining or perhaps bring excess weight means that your heart ought to work harder, and this commonly leads to high blood stress-- a significant source of center illness. Reaching a healthy body mass is actually vital to lowering your hazard of heart disease.

 

Understand serving dimensions. An offering dimension is actually a particular amount of food, specified by typical measurements like mugs, ounces, or perhaps pieces-- as well as a well-balanced offering dimension could be actually a lot more compact compared to you're made use of to. The encouraged offering size for noodles is 1/2 cup, while an offering of meat, chick, or even fish is actually 2 to 3 ozs (57-85 grams). Judging providing dimension is actually a found out skill-set, therefore you might must make use of gauging cups, spoons, as well as a food items size to assist.

Eyeball this. The moment you have a far better concept of exactly what an offering must be, you may predict your portion. You can easily make use of popular things for recommendation; as an example, an offering of pasta ought to be regarding the dimension of a ball (a little smaller than a cricket ball), while an offering of meat, fish, or chick has to do with the size as well as density of a deck of playing cards.

Be cautious of dining establishment portions. Portions provided in restaurants are commonly greater than anyone necessities. Crack an entrée with your eating buddy, or perhaps have half your meal home for tomorrow's lunch.

 

No solitary food may make you like magic healthy, therefore your target may be to incorporate a variety of healthy and balanced foods cooked in well-balanced means in to your diet regimen, and create these practices your fresh lifestyle.

The best meals for lowering blood cholesterol are oat meal, fish, pines (and also additional nuts), tawny oil, and meals reinforced along with sterols or stanols-- compounds located in flowers that help obstruct the absorption of blood cholesterol.

Browsing food items labels may often be actually complicated because packaged meals along with labels like "blood cholesterol free of charge" or perhaps "reasonable cholesterol levels" may not be automatically heart-healthy; they might perhaps even consist of cholesterol levels that is actually heart-risky. While browsing the alleys of a grocery shop in the U.S., appeal for foods items presenting the United states Soul Organization's heart-check scar to detect heart-healthy meals. Only as important since picking healthy and balanced foods items at the grocery store is just how you prepare those foods items into well-balanced meals.

U.S. Army National Guard Soldiers with the 1-178th Field Artillery Battalion, South Carolina National Guard, conduct a live fire training exercise May 1, 2021, at Fort Stewart, Georgia. The training consisted of artillery firing tables and direct fire lanes during their annual training. The unit is required to successfully accomplish all tables in order to be fully mission capable and ready to deploy. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Josiah Lining, 108th Public Affairs Detachment)

A fast moving vehicle capable of reaching 400mph. It is the prefered vehicle of the dreadful Void Guards. Used mainly for ground and mob control, the nebulon speedbike is, however, the perfect message carrier. Extremely silent and fast, it can outrun most of its enemies in a matter of seconds - and its small size makes it hard to hit, even for the fastest crafts. Very little is known concerning the mechanics involved in this machine but the red laser beam mounted on the front gives you a fair warning that there's really only one thing you should be concerned about - can you run THAT fast?

In the past few days I established that my new Nikon 1 camera is a capable device in its own right. Today I added the functionality for more field of view reach with my current array of Nikkor F-mount lenses (adding the 2.7x magnification in the Nikon 1 thanks to a just delivered FT1 adapter). My Nikon 1 presents the unique combination of a small compact camera body, compatibility with F-mount Nikkor lenses - and a big 2.7x crop factor.

 

When Nikon entered the mirrorless interchangeable lens digital market in October 2011, they chose the road less traveled, at least in terms of sensor size. Everyone in the market up to that point packed sensor sizes straight out of a APS-c DSLR (w/ a 1.5x crop), Nikon chose to go in the other direction. More than a few eyebrows were raised as the the Nikon 1 system carried a sensor with the Nikon designation "CX" along with a 2.7x crop factor.

 

Nikon held the resolution down to 10.1 megapixels which gave hope that the overall small sensor size might still deliver some decent high ISO noise performance (but skeptics noted that Nikon seemed to be bypassing larger sized sensors that, generally, would provide the better noise performance that was one of the major selling points for this new class of camera).

 

Almost overlooked in all the hoopla surrounding the introduction of the Nikon 1 in 2011 was this single sentence, buried deep in the press release: "Additionally, the FT1 F-mount adapter for legacy Nikkor lenses will be available in the future, so that photographers can utilize their collection of quality Nikkor lenses." The available FT1 F-mount adapter along with a camera bag full of Nikkor F-mount glass was my catalyst for the Nikon 1 purchase.

 

Equipping my Nikon1 with the FT1 adapter alone didn't change much in the way of weight and balance initially; the Nikon 1 10-30mm zoom weighs in at about 4.6 ounces and extends a minimum about 2.5 inches forward from the camera body. The FT1 adapter weighs in at 6 ounces and extends about 1.5 inches in front of the camera; the foot of the FT-1 is metal and threaded with the industry-standard 3/8 inch fitting to accept a tripod or ball head stud.

 

After I attached some F mount glass things start to get interesting. Currently, Nikon lists 65 current F-mount lenses that function with the FT1 on a Nikon 1, and without exception these lenses do not share the compact size and light weight of the Nikon 1 lens. Nevertheless, the Nikkor (and Sigma for Nikon) lenses I attached were surprisingly comfortable when hand held on the Nikon 1. Ease of handling is directly related to the barrel length of lens being used - shorter lenses handle easy attached to the Nikon 1, while longer lenses, particularly my 28-300mm (which when fully extended is about 12 inches) takes a bit more attention when balancing in my hand for shooting.

 

I have done some sample captures on this Nikon 1 with a Nikkor 28-300mm (75.6-810mm w/ the 2.7x crop), a Nikkor 35mm (94.5mm w/ the 2.7x crop), a Sigma 24-70mm (64.8- 89mm w/ the 2.7x crop) and a Sigma 15mm Fisheye (40.5mm w/ the 2.7 crop), a Nikkor 14-24mm (33.6-64.8mm w/ the 2.7x crop), and a Rikonon 8mm Fisheye (21.6mm w/ the 2.7x crop).

 

www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10200549294630188.10737...

+++ 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?

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The basic VF-1 was built and deployed in four minor variants (designated A, J, and S single-seater and the D two-seater/trainer) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie exoskeleton with enhanced protection and integrated missile launchers, the so-called FAST (“Fuel And Sensor Tray”) packs that created the fully space-capable "Super" Valkyries and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Super Valkyrie”.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several original variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), even though these machines were frequently updated and modified during their career, leading to a wide range of sub-variants and different standards.

 

Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design. One of these post-war designs became the VF-1EX, a replica variant of the VF-1J with up-to-date avionics and instrumentation. It was only built in small numbers in the late 2040s and was a dedicated variant for advanced training with dissimilar mock aerial and ground fighting.

 

The only operator of this type was Xaos (sometimes spelled as Chaos), a private and independent military and civilian contractor. Xaos was originally a fold navigation business that began venturing into fold wave communication and information, expanding rapidly during the 2050s and entering new business fields like flight tests and providing aggressor aircraft for military training. They were almost entirely independent from the New United Nations Spacy (NUNS) and was led by the mysterious Lady M. During the Vár Syndrome outbreak, Echo Squadron and Delta Flight and the tactical sound unit Thrones and Walküre were formed to counteract its effects in the Brísingr Globular Cluster.

 

The VF-1EX was restricted to its primary objective and never saw real combat. The replica unit retained the overall basic performance of the original VF-1 Valkyrie, the specifications being more than sufficient for training and mock combat. The only difference was the addition of the contemporary military EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system for the pilot as an emergency standard, an exoskeleton unit with personal inner-wear, two variable geometry wings, two hybrid jet/rocket engines, mechanical hardware for the head, torso, arms and legs. This feature gave the VF-1EX its new designation.

Furthermore, the VF-1EX was also outfitted with other electronic contingency functions like AI-assisted flight and remote override controls. Some of these features could be disabled according to necessity or pilot preferences. The gun pod unit was retained but was usually only loaded with paintball rounds for mock combat. For the same purpose, one of the original Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head unit" was replaced by a long-range laser target designator. AMM-1 missiles with dummy warheads or other training ordnance could be added to the wing hardpoints, but the VF-1EX was never seen being equipped this way - it remained an agile dogfighter.

  

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid. 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system.

 

Accommodation:

Single pilot in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

 

Dimensions:

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard take-off mass: 18.5 metric tons

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2);

4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard TOW 2.49; maximum TOW 1.24

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

1x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head" unit, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm

4x underwing hardpoints for a wide variety of ordnance

  

The kit and its assembly:

The VF-1EX Valkyrie is a Variable Fighter introduced in the Macross Δ television series, and it's, as described above, a replica training variant that resembles outwardly the VF-1J. There's even a Hasegawa 1:72 kit from 2016 of this obscure variant.

However, what I tried to recreate is a virtual (and purely fictional/non-canonical) VF-1EX, re-skinned by someone called David L. on the basis of a virtual VF-1S 3D model with a 2 m wing span (sounds like ~1:8 scale) for the Phoenix R/C simulator software. Check this for reference: www.supermotoxl.com/projects-articles/ready-to-drive-fly-...). How bizarre can things be/become? And how sick is a hardware model of it, though...?

 

I found the complex livery very attractive and had the plan to build a 1:100 model for some years now. But it took this long to gather enough mojo to tackle this project, due to the tricolor paint scheme's complex nature...

The "canvas" for this stunt is a vintage Arii 1:100 VF-1 kit, built OOB except for some standard mods. The kit was actually a VF-1A, but I had a spare VF-1J head unit in store as a suitable replacement. Externally, some dorsal blade aerials and vanes on the nose were added, the attachment points under the wings for the pylons were PSRed away. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit because this model would be displayed in flight. As a consequence, the ventral gun pod received an adapter at its tail and I added one of my home-brew wire displays, created on the basis of the kit's OOB plastic base.

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, this VF-1 is based on a re-skinned virtual R/C model, and its creator apparently took inspiration from a canonical VF fighter, namely a VF-31C "Siegfried", and specifically the "Mirage Farina Jenius Custom" version from the Macross Δ series that plays around 2051. Screenshots from the demo flight video under the link above provided various perspectives as painting reference, but the actual implementation on the tiny model caused serious headaches.

The VF-1's shapes are rather round and curvy, the model's jagged surface and small size prohibited masking. The kit is IMHO also best built and painted in single sub-assemblies, but upon closer inspection the screenshots revealed some marking inconsistencies (apparently edited from various videos?), and certain areas were left uncertain, e .g. the inside of the legs or the whole belly area. Therefore, this model is just a personal interpretation of the design, and as such I also deviated in the markings.

 

The paints became Humbrol 20 (Crimson) and 58 (Magenta), plus Revell 301 (Semi-gloss White), and they were applied with brushes. To replicate the edgy and rather fragmented pattern I initially laid down the two reds in a rather rough and thin fashion and painted the white dorsal and ventral areas. Once thoroughly dry, the white edges were quasi-masked with white decal material, either with stripes of various widths or tailored from sheet material, e. g. for the "wedges" on the wings and fins and the dorsal "swallow tail". This went more smoothly than expected, with a very convincing and clean result that i'd never had achieved with brushes alone, even with masking attempts, which would probably have led to chaos and too much paint on the model.

 

Other details like the grey leading edges or the air intakes were created with grey and black decal material, too.

No weathering was done, since the aircraft would be clean and in pristine condition, but I used a soft pencil to emphasize the engraved panel lines, esp. on white background. The gun pod became grey and the exhausts, painted in Revell 91 (Iron), were treated with graphite for a darker shade and a more metallic look.

 

Stencils came from the kit's OOB sheet, but only a few, since there was already a lot "going on" on the VF-1's hull. The flash-shaped Xaos insignia and the NUNS markings on legs and wings were printed at home - as well as the small black vernier thrusters all around the hull, for a uniform look. The USN style Modex and the small letter code on the fins came from an Colorado Decals F-5 sheet, for an aggressor aircraft.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed overall with semi-gloss acrlyic varnish (which turned out glossier than expected...) and position lights etc. added with translucent paint on top of a silver base.

  

Well, while the VF-1 was built OOB with no major mods and just some cosmetical upgrades, the paint scheme and its finish were more demanding - and I am happy that the "decal masking" trick worked so fine. The paint scheme surely is attractive, even though it IMHO does not really takes the VF-1's lines into account. Nevertheless, I am certain that there are not many models that are actually based on a virtual 1:8 scale 3D model of an iconic SF fighter, so that this VF-1EX might be unique.

 

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.

French Air Force personnel unfold photo voltaic solar panels connected to a “green to grid” portable trailer that can be deployed rapidly at the NATO Smart Energy Training and Assessment Camp (SETAC), at the Drawsko Pomorskie training area in Poland. The SETAC concept is deployed as part of the multinational Exercise Capable Logistician 2019, a regular exercise for NATO and Partner nations to test interoperability and assess NATO standards.

Elms are deciduous and semi-deciduous trees comprising the genus Ulmus in the family Ulmaceae. They are distributed over most of the Northern Hemisphere, inhabiting the temperate and tropical-montane regions of North America and Eurasia, presently ranging southward in the Middle East to Lebanon and Israel, and across the Equator in the Far East into Indonesia.

 

Elms are components of many kinds of natural forests. Moreover, during the 19th and early 20th centuries, many species and cultivars were also planted as ornamental street, garden, and park trees in Europe, North America, and parts of the Southern Hemisphere, notably Australasia. Some individual elms reached great size and age. However, in recent decades, most mature elms of European or North American origin have died from Dutch elm disease, caused by a microfungus dispersed by bark beetles. In response, disease-resistant cultivars have been developed, capable of restoring the elm to forestry and landscaping.

 

Description

The genus is hermaphroditic, having apetalous perfect flowers which are wind-pollinated. Elm leaves are alternate, with simple, single- or, most commonly, doubly serrate margins, usually asymmetric at the base and acuminate at the apex. The fruit is a round wind-dispersed samara flushed with chlorophyll, facilitating photosynthesis before the leaves emerge. The samarae are very light, those of British elms numbering around 50,000 to the pound (454 g). (Very rarely anomalous samarae occur with more than two wings.) All species are tolerant of a wide range of soils and pH levels but, with few exceptions, demand good drainage. The elm tree can grow to great height, the American elm in excess of 30 m (100 ft), often with a forked trunk creating a vase profile.

 

Taxonomy

There are about 30 to 40 species of Ulmus (elm); the ambiguity in number results from difficulty in delineating species, owing to the ease of hybridization between them and the development of local seed-sterile vegetatively propagated microspecies in some areas, mainly in the Ulmus field elm (Ulmus minor) group. Oliver Rackham describes Ulmus as the most critical genus in the entire British flora, adding that 'species and varieties are a distinction in the human mind rather than a measured degree of genetic variation'. Eight species are endemic to North America and three to Europe, but the greatest diversity is in Asia with approximately two dozen species. The oldest fossils of Ulmus are leaves dating Paleocene, found across the Northern Hemisphere.

 

The classification adopted in the List of elm species is largely based on that established by Brummitt. A large number of synonyms have accumulated over the last three centuries; their currently accepted names can be found in the list of Elm synonyms and accepted names.

 

Botanists who study elms and argue over elm identification and classification are called "pteleologists", from the Greek πτελέα (elm).

 

As part of the suborder urticalean rosids, they are distantly related to cannabis, mulberries, figs, hops, and nettles.

 

Elm propagation methods vary according to elm type and location, and the plantsman's needs. Native species may be propagated by seed. In their natural setting, native species, such as wych elm and European white elm in central and northern Europe and field elm in southern Europe, set viable seed in "favourable" seasons. Optimal conditions occur after a late warm spring. After pollination, seeds of spring-flowering elms ripen and fall at the start of summer (June); they remain viable for only a few days. They are planted in sandy potting soil at a depth of 1 cm, and germinate in three weeks. Slow-germinating American elm will remain dormant until the second season. Seeds from autumn-flowering elms ripen in the fall and germinate in the spring. Since elms may hybridize within and between species, seed propagation entails a hybridisation risk. In unfavourable seasons, elm seeds are usually sterile. Elms outside their natural range, such as English elm U. minor 'Atinia', and elms unable to pollinate because pollen sources are genetically identical, are sterile and are propagated by vegetative reproduction. Vegetative reproduction is also used to produce genetically identical elms (clones). Methods include the winter transplanting of root suckers; taking hardwood cuttings from vigorous one-year-old shoots in late winter, taking root cuttings in early spring; taking softwood cuttings in early summer; grafting; ground and air layering; and micropropagation. A bottom heat of 18 °C and humid conditions are maintained for hard- and softwood cuttings. The transplanting of root suckers remains the easiest most and common propagation method for European field elm and its hybrids. For specimen urban elms, grafting to wych-elm rootstock may be used to eliminate suckering or to ensure stronger root growth. The mutant-elm cultivars are usually grafted, the "weeping" elms 'Camperdown' and 'Horizontalis' at 2–3 m (7–10 ft), the dwarf cultivars 'Nana' and 'Jacqueline Hillier' at ground level. Since the Siberian elm is drought tolerant, in dry countries, new varieties of elm are often root-grafted onto this species.

 

Dutch elm disease (DED) devastated elms throughout Europe and much of North America in the second half of the 20th century. It derives its name "Dutch" from the first description of the disease and its cause in the 1920s by Dutch botanists Bea Schwarz and Christina Johanna Buisman. Owing to its geographical isolation and effective quarantine enforcement, Australia has so far remained unaffected by DED, as have the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia in western Canada.

 

DED is caused by a microfungus transmitted by two species of Scolytus elm-bark beetles, which act as vectors. The disease affects all species of elms native to North America and Europe, but many Asiatic species have evolved antifungal genes and are resistant. Fungal spores, introduced into wounds in the tree caused by the beetles, invade the xylem or vascular system. The tree responds by producing tyloses, effectively blocking the flow from roots to leaves. Woodland trees in North America are not quite as susceptible to the disease because they usually lack the root grafting of the urban elms and are somewhat more isolated from each other. In France, inoculation with the fungus of over 300 clones of the European species failed to find a single variety that possessed of any significant resistance.

 

The first, less aggressive strain of the disease fungus, Ophiostoma ulmi, arrived in Europe from Asia in 1910, and was accidentally introduced to North America in 1928. It was steadily weakened by viruses in Europe and had all but disappeared by the 1940s. However, the disease had a much greater and longer-lasting impact in North America, owing to the greater susceptibility of the American elm, Ulmus americana, which masked the emergence of the second, far more virulent strain of the disease Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. It appeared in the United States sometime in the 1940s, and was originally believed to be a mutation of O. ulmi. Limited gene flow from O. ulmi to O. novo-ulmi was probably responsible for the creation of the North American subspecies O. novo-ulmi subsp. americana. It was first recognized in Britain in the early 1970s, believed to have been introduced via a cargo of Canadian rock elm destined for the boatbuilding industry, and rapidly eradicated most of the mature elms from western Europe. A second subspecies, O. novo-ulmi subsp. novo-ulmi, caused similar devastation in Eastern Europe and Central This subspecies, which was introduced to North America, and like O. ulmi, is thought to have originated in Asia. The two subspecies have now hybridized in Europe where their ranges have overlapped. The hypothesis that O. novo-ulmi arose from a hybrid of the original O. ulmi and another strain endemic to the Himalayas, Ophiostoma himal-ulmi, is now discredited.

 

No sign indicates the current pandemic is waning, and no evidence has been found of a susceptibility of the fungus to a disease of its own caused by d-factors: naturally occurring virus-like agents that severely debilitated the original O. ulmi and reduced its sporulation.

 

Elm phloem necrosis

Elm phloem necrosis (elm yellows) is a disease of elm trees that is spread by leafhoppers or by root grafts. This very aggressive disease, with no known cure, occurs in the Eastern United States, southern Ontario in Canada, and Europe. It is caused by phytoplasmas that infect the phloem (inner bark) of the tree. Infection and death of the phloem effectively girdles the tree and stops the flow of water and nutrients. The disease affects both wild-growing and cultivated trees. Occasionally, cutting the infected tree before the disease completely establishes itself and cleanup and prompt disposal of infected matter has resulted in the plant's survival via stump sprouts.

 

Most serious of the elm pests is the elm leaf beetle Xanthogaleruca luteola, which can decimate foliage, although rarely with fatal results. The beetle was accidentally introduced to North America from Europe. Another unwelcome immigrant to North America is the Japanese beetle Popillia japonica. In both instances, the beetles cause far more damage in North America owing to the absence of the predators in their native lands. In Australia, introduced elm trees are sometimes used as food plants by the larvae of hepialid moths of the genus Aenetus. These burrow horizontally into the trunk then vertically down. Circa 2000, the Asian Zig-zag sawfly Aproceros leucopoda appeared in Europe and North America, although in England, its impact has been minimal and it is no longer monitored.

 

One of the earliest of ornamental elms was the ball-headed graft narvan elm, Ulmus minor 'Umbraculifera', cultivated from time immemorial in Persia as a shade tree and widely planted in cities through much of south-west and central Asia. From the 18th century to the early 20th century, elms, whether species, hybrids, or cultivars, were among the most widely planted ornamental trees in both Europe and North America. They were particularly popular as a street tree in avenue plantings in towns and cities, creating high-tunnelled effects. Their quick growth and variety of foliage and forms, their tolerance of air-pollution, and the comparatively rapid decomposition of their leaf litter in the fall were further advantages.

 

In North America, the species most commonly planted was the American elm (U. americana), which had unique properties that made it ideal for such use - rapid growth, adaptation to a broad range of climates and soils, strong wood, resistance to wind damage, and vase-like growth habit requiring minimal pruning. In Europe, the wych elm (U. glabra) and the field elm (U. minor) were the most widely planted in the countryside, the former in northern areas including Scandinavia and northern Britain, the latter further south. The hybrid between these two, Dutch elm (U. × hollandica), occurs naturally and was also commonly planted. In much of England, the English elm later came to dominate the horticultural landscape. Most commonly planted in hedgerows, it sometimes occurred in densities over 1000/km2. In south-eastern Australia and New Zealand, large numbers of English and Dutch elms, as well as other species and cultivars, were planted as ornamentals following their introduction in the 19th century, while in northern Japan Japanese elm (U. davidiana var. japonica) was widely planted as a street tree. From about 1850 to 1920, the most prized small ornamental elm in parks and gardens was the 'Camperdown' elm (U. glabra 'Camperdownii'), a contorted, weeping cultivar of the wych elm grafted on to a nonweeping elm trunk to give a wide, spreading, and weeping fountain shape in large garden spaces.

 

In northern Europe, elms were, moreover, among the few trees tolerant of saline deposits from sea spray, which can cause "salt-burning" and die-back. This tolerance made elms reliable both as shelterbelt trees exposed to sea wind, in particular along the coastlines of southern and western Britain and in the Low Countries, and as trees for coastal towns and cities.

 

This belle époque lasted until the First World War, when as a consequence of hostilities, notably in Germany, whence at least 40 cultivars originated, and of the outbreak at about the same time of the early strain of DED, Ophiostoma ulmi, the elm began its slide into horticultural decline. The devastation caused by the Second World War, and the demise in 1944 of the huge Späth nursery in Berlin, only accelerated the process. The outbreak of the new, three times more virulent, strain of DED Ophiostoma novo-ulmi in the late 1960s, brought the tree to its nadir.

 

Since around 1990, the elm has enjoyed a renaissance through the successful development in North America and Europe of cultivars highly resistant to DED. Consequently, the total number of named cultivars, ancient and modern, now exceeds 300, although many of the older clones, possibly over 120, have been lost to cultivation. Some of the latter, however, were by today's standards inadequately described or illustrated before the pandemic, and a number may survive, or have regenerated, unrecognised. Enthusiasm for the newer clones often remains low owing to the poor performance of earlier, supposedly disease-resistant Dutch trees released in the 1960s and 1970s. In the Netherlands, sales of elm cultivars slumped from over 56,000 in 1989 to just 6,800 in 2004, whilst in the UK, only four of the new American and European releases were commercially available in 2008.

 

Efforts to develop DED-resistant cultivars began in the Netherlands in 1928 and continued, uninterrupted by World War II, until 1992. Similar programmes were initiated in North America (1937), Italy (1978), and Spain (1986). Research has followed two paths:

 

Species and species cultivars

In North America, careful selection has produced a number of trees resistant not only to DED, but also to the droughts and cold winters that occur within the continent. Research in the United States has concentrated on the American elm (U. americana), resulting in the release of DED-resistant clones, notably the cultivars 'Valley Forge' and 'Jefferson'. Much work has also been done into the selection of disease-resistant Asiatic species and cultivars.

 

In 1993, Mariam B. Sticklen and James L. Sherald reported the results of experiments funded by the U.S. National Park Service and conducted at Michigan State University in East Lansing that were designed to apply genetic engineering techniques to the development of DED-resistant strains of American elm trees. In 2007, A. E. Newhouse and F. Schrodt of the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse reported that young transgenic American elm trees had shown reduced DED symptoms and normal mycorrhizal colonization.

 

In Europe, the European white elm (U. laevis) has received much attention. While this elm has little innate resistance to DED, it is not favoured by the vector bark beetles. Thus it only becomes colonized and infected when no other elms are available, a rare situation in western Europe. Research in Spain has suggested that it may be the presence of a triterpene, alnulin, which makes the tree bark unattractive to the beetle species that spread the disease. This possibility, though, has not been conclusively proven. More recently, field elms Ulmus minor highly resistant to DED have been discovered in Spain, and form the basis of a major breeding programme.

 

Hybrid cultivars

Owing to their innate resistance to DED, Asiatic species have been crossed with European species, or with other Asiatic elms, to produce trees that are both highly resistant to disease and tolerant of native climates. After a number of false dawns in the 1970s, this approach has produced a range of reliable hybrid cultivars now commercially available in North America and Europe. Disease resistance is invariably carried by the female parent.

 

Some of these cultivars, notably those with the Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) in their ancestry, lack the forms for which the iconic American elm and English elm were prized. Moreover, several exported to northwestern Europe have proven unsuited to the maritime climate conditions there, notably because of their intolerance of anoxic conditions resulting from ponding on poorly drained soils in winter. Dutch hybridizations invariably included the Himalayan elm (Ulmus wallichiana) as a source of antifungal genes and have proven more tolerant of wet ground; they should also ultimately reach a greater size. However, the susceptibility of the cultivar 'Lobel', used as a control in Italian trials, to elm yellows has now (2014) raised a question mark over all the Dutch clones.

 

Several highly resistant Ulmus cultivars have been released since 2000 by the Institute of Plant Protection in Florence, most commonly featuring crosses of the Dutch cultivar 'Plantijn' with the Siberian elm to produce resistant trees better adapted to the Mediterranean climate.

 

Cautions regarding novel cultivars

Elms take many decades to grow to maturity, and as the introduction of these disease-resistant cultivars is relatively recent, their long-term performance and ultimate size and form cannot be predicted with certainty. The National Elm Trial in North America, begun in 2005, is a nationwide trial to assess strengths and weaknesses of the 19 leading cultivars raised in the US over a 10-year period; European cultivars have been excluded. Meanwhile, in Europe, American and European cultivars are being assessed in field trials started in 2000 by the UK charity Butterfly Conservation.

 

The oldest American elm trees in New York City's Central Park were planted in the 1860s by Frederick Law Olmsted, making them among the oldest stands of American elms in the world. Along the Mall and Literary Walk four lines of American elms stretch over the walkway forming a cathedral-like covering. A part of New York City's urban ecology, the elms improve air and water quality, reduce erosion and flooding, and decrease air temperatures during warm days.

 

While the stand is still vulnerable to DED, in the 1980s the Central Park Conservancy undertook aggressive countermeasures such as heavy pruning and removal of extensively diseased trees. These efforts have largely been successful in saving the majority of the trees, although several are still lost each year. Younger American elms that have been planted in Central Park since the outbreak are of the DED-resistant 'Princeton' and 'Valley Forge' cultivars.

 

Several rows of American elm trees that the National Park Service (NPS) first planted during the 1930s line much of the 1.9-mile-length (3 km) of the National Mall in Washington, DC. DED first appeared on the trees during the 1950s and reached a peak in the 1970s. The NPS used a number of methods to control the epidemic, including sanitation, pruning, injecting trees with fungicide, and replanting with DED-resistant cultivars. The NPS combated the disease's local insect vector, the smaller European elm bark beetle (Scolytus multistriatus), by trapping and by spraying with insecticides. As a result, the population of American elms planted on the Mall and its surrounding areas has remained intact for more than 80 years.

 

Elm wood is valued for its interlocking grain, and consequent resistance to splitting, with significant uses in wagon-wheel hubs, chair seats, and coffins. The bodies of Japanese Taiko drums are often cut from the wood of old elm trees, as the wood's resistance to splitting is highly desired for nailing the skins to them, and a set of three or more is often cut from the same tree. The elm's wood bends well and distorts easily. The often long, straight trunks were favoured as a source of timber for keels in ship construction. Elm is also prized by bowyers; of the ancient bows found in Europe, a large portion are elm. During the Middle Ages, elm was also used to make longbows if yew were unavailable.

 

The first written references to elm occur in the Linear B lists of military equipment at Knossos in the Mycenaean period. Several of the chariots are of elm (" πτε-ρε-ϝα ", pte-re-wa), and the lists twice mention wheels of elmwood. Hesiod says that ploughs in Ancient Greece were also made partly of elm.

 

The density of elm wood varies between species, but averages around 560 kg/m3.

 

Elm wood is also resistant to decay when permanently wet, and hollowed trunks were widely used as water pipes during the medieval period in Europe. Elm was also used as piers in the construction of the original London Bridge, but this resistance to decay in water does not extend to ground contact.

 

Viticulture

The Romans, and more recently the Italians, planted elms in vineyards as supports for vines. Lopped at 3 m, the elms' quick growth, twiggy lateral branches, light shade, and root suckering made them ideal trees for this purpose. The lopped branches were used for fodder and firewood. Ovid in his Amores characterizes the elm as "loving the vine": ulmus amat vitem, vitis non deserit ulmum (the elm loves the vine, the vine does not desert the elm), and the ancients spoke of the "marriage" between elm and vine.

 

Medicinal products

The mucilaginous inner bark of the slippery elm (Ulmus rubra) has long been used as a demulcent, and is still produced commercially for this purpose in the U.S. with approval for sale as a nutritional supplement by the Food and Drug Administration.

 

Fodder

Elms also have a long history of cultivation for fodder, with the leafy branches cut to feed livestock. The practice continues today in the Himalaya, where it contributes to serious deforestation.

 

Biomass

As fossil fuel resources diminish, increasing attention is being paid to trees as sources of energy. In Italy, the Istituto per la Protezione delle Piante is (2012) in the process of releasing to commerce very fast-growing elm cultivars, able to increase in height by more than 2 m (6 ft) per year.

 

Food

Elm bark, cut into strips and boiled, sustained much of the rural population of Norway during the great famine of 1812. The seeds are particularly nutritious, containing 45% crude protein, and less than 7% fibre by dry mass.

 

Elm has been listed as one of the 38 substances that are used to prepare Bach flower remedies, a kind of alternative medicine.

 

Bonsai

Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) is a popular choice for bonsai owing to its tolerance of severe pruning.

 

Genetic resource conservation

In 1997, a European Union elm project was initiated, its aim to coordinate the conservation of all the elm genetic resources of the member states and, among other things, to assess their resistance to Dutch elm disease. Accordingly, over 300 clones were selected and propagated for testing.

 

Culture

Notable elm trees

Many elm trees of various kinds have attained great size or otherwise become particularly noteworthy.

 

In art

Many artists have admired elms for the ease and grace of their branching and foliage, and have painted them with sensitivity. Elms are a recurring element in the landscapes and studies of, for example, John Constable, Ferdinand Georg Waldmüller, Frederick Childe Hassam, Karel Klinkenberg, and George Inness.

 

In Greek mythology, the nymph Ptelea (Πτελέα, Elm) was one of the eight hamadryads, nymphs of the forest and daughters of Oxylos and Hamadryas. In his Hymn to Artemis, poet Callimachus (third century BC) tells how, at the age of three, the infant goddess Artemis practised her newly acquired silver bow and arrows, made for her by Hephaestus and the Cyclopes, by shooting first at an elm, then at an oak, before turning her aim on a wild animal:

 

πρῶτον ἐπὶ πτελέην, τὸ δὲ δεύτερον ἧκας ἐπὶ δρῦν, τὸ τρίτον αὖτ᾽ ἐπὶ θῆρα.

The first reference in literature to elms occurs in the Iliad. When Eetion, father of Andromache, is killed by Achilles during the Trojan War, the mountain nymphs plant elms on his tomb ("περί δὲ πτελέας ἐφύτευσαν νύμφαι ὀρεστιάδες, κoῦραι Διὸς αἰγιόχoιo"). Also in the Iliad, when the River Scamander, indignant at the sight of so many corpses in his water, overflows and threatens to drown Achilles, the latter grasps a branch of a great elm in an attempt to save himself ("ὁ δὲ πτελέην ἕλε χερσὶν εὐφυέα μεγάλην".

 

The nymphs also planted elms on the tomb in the Thracian Chersonese of "great-hearted Protesilaus" ("μεγάθυμου Πρωτεσιλάου"), the first Greek to fall in the Trojan War. These elms grew to be the tallest in the known world, but when their topmost branches saw far off the ruins of Troy, they immediately withered, so great still was the bitterness of the hero buried below, who had been loved by Laodamia and slain by Hector. The story is the subject of a poem by Antiphilus of Byzantium (first century AD) in the Palatine Anthology:

 

Θεσσαλὲ Πρωτεσίλαε, σὲ μὲν πολὺς ᾄσεται αἰών,

Tρoίᾳ ὀφειλoμένoυ πτώματος ἀρξάμενoν•

σᾶμα δὲ τοι πτελέῃσι συνηρεφὲς ἀμφικoμεῦση

Nύμφαι, ἀπεχθoμένης Ἰλίoυ ἀντιπέρας.

Δένδρα δὲ δυσμήνιτα, καὶ ἤν ποτε τεῖχoς ἴδωσι

Tρώϊον, αὐαλέην φυλλοχoεῦντι κόμην.

ὅσσoς ἐν ἡρώεσσι τότ᾽ ἦν χόλoς, oὗ μέρoς ἀκμὴν

ἐχθρὸν ἐν ἀψύχoις σώζεται ἀκρέμoσιν.

[:Thessalian Protesilaos, a long age shall sing your praises,

Of the destined dead at Troy the first;

Your tomb with thick-foliaged elms they covered,

The nymphs, across the water from hated Ilion.

Trees full of anger; and whenever that wall they see,

Of Troy, the leaves in their upper crown wither and fall.

So great in the heroes was the bitterness then, some of which still

Remembers, hostile, in the soulless upper branches.]

Protesilaus had been king of Pteleos (Πτελεός) in Thessaly, which took its name from the abundant elms (πτελέoι) in the region.

 

Elms occur often in pastoral poetry, where they symbolise the idyllic life, their shade being mentioned as a place of special coolness and peace. In the first Idyll of Theocritus (third century BC), for example, the goatherd invites the shepherd to sit "here beneath the elm" ("δεῦρ' ὑπὸ τὰν πτελέαν") and sing. Beside elms, Theocritus places "the sacred water" ("το ἱερὸν ὕδωρ") of the Springs of the Nymphs and the shrines to the nymphs.

 

Aside from references literal and metaphorical to the elm and vine theme, the tree occurs in Latin literature in the Elm of Dreams in the Aeneid. When the Sibyl of Cumae leads Aeneas down to the Underworld, one of the sights is the Stygian Elm:

 

In medio ramos annosaque bracchia pandit

ulmus opaca, ingens, quam sedem somnia vulgo

uana tenere ferunt, foliisque sub omnibus haerent.

:Spreads in the midst her boughs and agéd arms

an elm, huge, shadowy, where vain dreams, 'tis said,

are wont to roost them, under every leaf close-clinging.]

Virgil refers to a Roman superstition (vulgo) that elms were trees of ill-omen because their fruit seemed to be of no value. It has been noted that two elm-motifs have arisen from classical literature: the 'Paradisal Elm' motif, arising from pastoral idylls and the elm-and-vine theme, and the 'Elm and Death' motif, perhaps arising from Homer's commemorative elms and Virgil's Stygian Elm. Many references to elm in European literature from the Renaissance onwards fit into one or other of these categories.

 

There are two examples of pteleogenesis (:birth from elms) in world myths. In Germanic and Scandinavian mythology the first woman, Embla, was fashioned from an elm, while in Japanese mythology Kamuy Fuchi, the chief goddess of the Ainu people, "was born from an elm impregnated by the Possessor of the Heavens".

 

The elm occurs frequently in English literature, one of the best known instances being in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream, where Titania, Queen of the Fairies, addresses her beloved Nick Bottom using an elm-simile. Here, as often in the elm-and-vine motif, the elm is a masculine symbol:

 

Sleep thou, and I will wind thee in my arms.

... the female Ivy so

Enrings the barky fingers of the Elm.

O, how I love thee! how I dote on thee!

Another of the most famous kisses in English literature, that of Paul and Helen at the start of Forster's Howards End, is stolen beneath a great wych elm.

 

The elm tree is also referenced in children's literature. An Elm Tree and Three Sisters by Norma Sommerdorf is a children's book about three young sisters who plant a small elm tree in their backyard.

 

In politics

The cutting of the elm was a diplomatic altercation between the kings of France and England in 1188, during which an elm tree near Gisors in Normandy was felled.

 

In politics, the elm is associated with revolutions. In England after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the final victory of parliamentarians over monarchists, and the arrival from Holland, with William III and Mary II, of the Dutch elm hybrid, planting of this cultivar became a fashion among enthusiasts of the new political order.

 

In the American Revolution, the Liberty Tree was an American white elm in Boston, Massachusetts, in front of which, from 1765, the first resistance meetings were held against British attempts to tax the American colonists without democratic representation. When the British, knowing that the tree was a symbol of rebellion, felled it in 1775, the Americans took to widespread Liberty Elm planting, and sewed elm symbols on to their revolutionary flags. Elm planting by American Presidents later became something of a tradition.

 

In the French Revolution, too, Les arbres de la liberté (Liberty Trees), often elms, were planted as symbols of revolutionary hopes, the first in Vienne, Isère, in 1790, by a priest inspired by the Boston elm. L'Orme de La Madeleine (:the Elm of La Madeleine), Faycelles, Département de Lot, planted around 1790 and surviving to this day, was a case in point. By contrast, a famous Parisian elm associated with the Ancien Régime, L'Orme de Saint-Gervais in the Place St-Gervais, was felled by the revolutionaries; church authorities planted a new elm in its place in 1846, and an early 20th-century elm stands on the site today. Premier Lionel Jospin, obliged by tradition to plant a tree in the garden of the Hôtel Matignon, the official residence and workplace of Prime Ministers of France, insisted on planting an elm, so-called 'tree of the Left', choosing the new disease-resistant hybrid 'Clone 762' (Ulmus 'Wanoux' = Vada). In the French Republican Calendar, in use from 1792 to 1806, the 12th day of the month Ventôse (= 2 March) was officially named "jour de l'Orme", Day of the Elm.

 

Liberty Elms were also planted in other countries in Europe to celebrate their revolutions, an example being L'Olmo di Montepaone, L'Albero della Libertà (:the Elm of Montepaone, Liberty Tree) in Montepaone, Calabria, planted in 1799 to commemorate the founding of the democratic Parthenopean Republic, and surviving until it was brought down by a recent storm (it has since been cloned and 'replanted'). After the Greek Revolution of 1821–32, a thousand young elms were brought to Athens from Missolonghi, "Sacred City of the Struggle" against the Turks and scene of Lord Byron's death, and planted in 1839–40 in the National Garden. In an ironic development, feral elms have spread and invaded the grounds of the abandoned Greek royal summer palace at Tatoi in Attica.

 

In a chance event linking elms and revolution, on the morning of his execution (30 January 1649), walking to the scaffold at the Palace of Whitehall, King Charles I turned to his guards and pointed out, with evident emotion, an elm near the entrance to Spring Gardens that had been planted by his brother in happier days. The tree was said to be still standing in the 1860s.

+++ 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?

See more photos of this, and the Wikipedia article.

 

Details, quoting from Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird:

 

No reconnaissance aircraft in history has operated globally in more hostile airspace or with such complete impunity than the SR-71, the world's fastest jet-propelled aircraft. The Blackbird's performance and operational achievements placed it at the pinnacle of aviation technology developments during the Cold War.

 

This Blackbird accrued about 2,800 hours of flight time during 24 years of active service with the U.S. Air Force. On its last flight, March 6, 1990, Lt. Col. Ed Yielding and Lt. Col. Joseph Vida set a speed record by flying from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., in 1 hour, 4 minutes, and 20 seconds, averaging 3,418 kilometers (2,124 miles) per hour. At the flight's conclusion, they landed at Washington-Dulles International Airport and turned the airplane over to the Smithsonian.

 

Transferred from the United States Air Force.

 

Manufacturer:

Lockheed Aircraft Corporation

 

Designer:

Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson

 

Date:

1964

 

Country of Origin:

United States of America

 

Dimensions:

Overall: 18ft 5 15/16in. x 55ft 7in. x 107ft 5in., 169998.5lb. (5.638m x 16.942m x 32.741m, 77110.8kg)

Other: 18ft 5 15/16in. x 107ft 5in. x 55ft 7in. (5.638m x 32.741m x 16.942m)

 

Materials:

Titanium

 

Physical Description:

Twin-engine, two-seat, supersonic strategic reconnaissance aircraft; airframe constructed largley of titanium and its alloys; vertical tail fins are constructed of a composite (laminated plastic-type material) to reduce radar cross-section; Pratt and Whitney J58 (JT11D-20B) turbojet engines feature large inlet shock cones.

 

Long Description:

No reconnaissance aircraft in history has operated in more hostile airspace or with such complete impunity than the SR-71 Blackbird. It is the fastest aircraft propelled by air-breathing engines. The Blackbird's performance and operational achievements placed it at the pinnacle of aviation technology developments during the Cold War. The airplane was conceived when tensions with communist Eastern Europe reached levels approaching a full-blown crisis in the mid-1950s. U.S. military commanders desperately needed accurate assessments of Soviet worldwide military deployments, particularly near the Iron Curtain. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation's subsonic U-2 (see NASM collection) reconnaissance aircraft was an able platform but the U. S. Air Force recognized that this relatively slow aircraft was already vulnerable to Soviet interceptors. They also understood that the rapid development of surface-to-air missile systems could put U-2 pilots at grave risk. The danger proved reality when a U-2 was shot down by a surface to air missile over the Soviet Union in 1960.

 

Lockheed's first proposal for a new high speed, high altitude, reconnaissance aircraft, to be capable of avoiding interceptors and missiles, centered on a design propelled by liquid hydrogen. This proved to be impracticable because of considerable fuel consumption. Lockheed then reconfigured the design for conventional fuels. This was feasible and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), already flying the Lockheed U-2, issued a production contract for an aircraft designated the A-12. Lockheed's clandestine 'Skunk Works' division (headed by the gifted design engineer Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson) designed the A-12 to cruise at Mach 3.2 and fly well above 18,288 m (60,000 feet). To meet these challenging requirements, Lockheed engineers overcame many daunting technical challenges. Flying more than three times the speed of sound generates 316° C (600° F) temperatures on external aircraft surfaces, which are enough to melt conventional aluminum airframes. The design team chose to make the jet's external skin of titanium alloy to which shielded the internal aluminum airframe. Two conventional, but very powerful, afterburning turbine engines propelled this remarkable aircraft. These power plants had to operate across a huge speed envelope in flight, from a takeoff speed of 334 kph (207 mph) to more than 3,540 kph (2,200 mph). To prevent supersonic shock waves from moving inside the engine intake causing flameouts, Johnson's team had to design a complex air intake and bypass system for the engines.

 

Skunk Works engineers also optimized the A-12 cross-section design to exhibit a low radar profile. Lockheed hoped to achieve this by carefully shaping the airframe to reflect as little transmitted radar energy (radio waves) as possible, and by application of special paint designed to absorb, rather than reflect, those waves. This treatment became one of the first applications of stealth technology, but it never completely met the design goals.

 

Test pilot Lou Schalk flew the single-seat A-12 on April 24, 1962, after he became airborne accidentally during high-speed taxi trials. The airplane showed great promise but it needed considerable technical refinement before the CIA could fly the first operational sortie on May 31, 1967 - a surveillance flight over North Vietnam. A-12s, flown by CIA pilots, operated as part of the Air Force's 1129th Special Activities Squadron under the "Oxcart" program. While Lockheed continued to refine the A-12, the U. S. Air Force ordered an interceptor version of the aircraft designated the YF-12A. The Skunk Works, however, proposed a "specific mission" version configured to conduct post-nuclear strike reconnaissance. This system evolved into the USAF's familiar SR-71.

 

Lockheed built fifteen A-12s, including a special two-seat trainer version. Two A-12s were modified to carry a special reconnaissance drone, designated D-21. The modified A-12s were redesignated M-21s. These were designed to take off with the D-21 drone, powered by a Marquart ramjet engine mounted on a pylon between the rudders. The M-21 then hauled the drone aloft and launched it at speeds high enough to ignite the drone's ramjet motor. Lockheed also built three YF-12As but this type never went into production. Two of the YF-12As crashed during testing. Only one survives and is on display at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. The aft section of one of the "written off" YF-12As which was later used along with an SR-71A static test airframe to manufacture the sole SR-71C trainer. One SR-71 was lent to NASA and designated YF-12C. Including the SR-71C and two SR-71B pilot trainers, Lockheed constructed thirty-two Blackbirds. The first SR-71 flew on December 22, 1964. Because of extreme operational costs, military strategists decided that the more capable USAF SR-71s should replace the CIA's A-12s. These were retired in 1968 after only one year of operational missions, mostly over southeast Asia. The Air Force's 1st Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron (part of the 9th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing) took over the missions, flying the SR-71 beginning in the spring of 1968.

 

After the Air Force began to operate the SR-71, it acquired the official name Blackbird-- for the special black paint that covered the airplane. This paint was formulated to absorb radar signals, to radiate some of the tremendous airframe heat generated by air friction, and to camouflage the aircraft against the dark sky at high altitudes.

 

Experience gained from the A-12 program convinced the Air Force that flying the SR-71 safely required two crew members, a pilot and a Reconnaissance Systems Officer (RSO). The RSO operated with the wide array of monitoring and defensive systems installed on the airplane. This equipment included a sophisticated Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) system that could jam most acquisition and targeting radar. In addition to an array of advanced, high-resolution cameras, the aircraft could also carry equipment designed to record the strength, frequency, and wavelength of signals emitted by communications and sensor devices such as radar. The SR-71 was designed to fly deep into hostile territory, avoiding interception with its tremendous speed and high altitude. It could operate safely at a maximum speed of Mach 3.3 at an altitude more than sixteen miles, or 25,908 m (85,000 ft), above the earth. The crew had to wear pressure suits similar to those worn by astronauts. These suits were required to protect the crew in the event of sudden cabin pressure loss while at operating altitudes.

 

To climb and cruise at supersonic speeds, the Blackbird's Pratt & Whitney J-58 engines were designed to operate continuously in afterburner. While this would appear to dictate high fuel flows, the Blackbird actually achieved its best "gas mileage," in terms of air nautical miles per pound of fuel burned, during the Mach 3+ cruise. A typical Blackbird reconnaissance flight might require several aerial refueling operations from an airborne tanker. Each time the SR-71 refueled, the crew had to descend to the tanker's altitude, usually about 6,000 m to 9,000 m (20,000 to 30,000 ft), and slow the airplane to subsonic speeds. As velocity decreased, so did frictional heat. This cooling effect caused the aircraft's skin panels to shrink considerably, and those covering the fuel tanks contracted so much that fuel leaked, forming a distinctive vapor trail as the tanker topped off the Blackbird. As soon as the tanks were filled, the jet's crew disconnected from the tanker, relit the afterburners, and again climbed to high altitude.

 

Air Force pilots flew the SR-71 from Kadena AB, Japan, throughout its operational career but other bases hosted Blackbird operations, too. The 9th SRW occasionally deployed from Beale AFB, California, to other locations to carryout operational missions. Cuban missions were flown directly from Beale. The SR-71 did not begin to operate in Europe until 1974, and then only temporarily. In 1982, when the U.S. Air Force based two aircraft at Royal Air Force Base Mildenhall to fly monitoring mission in Eastern Europe.

 

When the SR-71 became operational, orbiting reconnaissance satellites had already replaced manned aircraft to gather intelligence from sites deep within Soviet territory. Satellites could not cover every geopolitical hotspot so the Blackbird remained a vital tool for global intelligence gathering. On many occasions, pilots and RSOs flying the SR-71 provided information that proved vital in formulating successful U. S. foreign policy. Blackbird crews provided important intelligence about the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and its aftermath, and pre- and post-strike imagery of the 1986 raid conducted by American air forces on Libya. In 1987, Kadena-based SR-71 crews flew a number of missions over the Persian Gulf, revealing Iranian Silkworm missile batteries that threatened commercial shipping and American escort vessels.

 

As the performance of space-based surveillance systems grew, along with the effectiveness of ground-based air defense networks, the Air Force started to lose enthusiasm for the expensive program and the 9th SRW ceased SR-71 operations in January 1990. Despite protests by military leaders, Congress revived the program in 1995. Continued wrangling over operating budgets, however, soon led to final termination. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration retained two SR-71As and the one SR-71B for high-speed research projects and flew these airplanes until 1999.

 

On March 6, 1990, the service career of one Lockheed SR-71A Blackbird ended with a record-setting flight. This special airplane bore Air Force serial number 64-17972. Lt. Col. Ed Yeilding and his RSO, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Vida, flew this aircraft from Los Angeles to Washington D.C. in 1 hour, 4 minutes, and 20 seconds, averaging a speed of 3,418 kph (2,124 mph). At the conclusion of the flight, '972 landed at Dulles International Airport and taxied into the custody of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum. At that time, Lt. Col. Vida had logged 1,392.7 hours of flight time in Blackbirds, more than that of any other crewman.

 

This particular SR-71 was also flown by Tom Alison, a former National Air and Space Museum's Chief of Collections Management. Flying with Detachment 1 at Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, Alison logged more than a dozen '972 operational sorties. The aircraft spent twenty-four years in active Air Force service and accrued a total of 2,801.1 hours of flight time.

 

Wingspan: 55'7"

Length: 107'5"

Height: 18'6"

Weight: 170,000 Lbs

 

Reference and Further Reading:

 

Crickmore, Paul F. Lockheed SR-71: The Secret Missions Exposed. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 1996.

 

Francillon, Rene J. Lockheed Aircraft Since 1913. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1987.

 

Johnson, Clarence L. Kelly: More Than My Share of It All. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985.

 

Miller, Jay. Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works. Leicester, U.K.: Midland Counties Publishing Ltd., 1995.

 

Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird curatorial file, Aeronautics Division, National Air and Space Museum.

 

DAD, 11-11-01

Overview

Minolta is a company with long experience in the world of film, and extensive digital expertise that has so far been applied primarily in the areas of office electronics and imaging (copiers & printers). Recently though, they've been making significant waves in the digital camera and scanner markets, with their highly capable (and expandable!) Dimage EX 1500 Zoom digital camera, and a whole line of film scanners covering everything from APS to 35mm, to medium-format photography. We'll be reviewing the full range of the Dimage scanners, beginning with the Dimage Scan Speed that's the subject of this review.

The Minolta Dimage Scan Speed film scanner is quite a bit more capable than some of the "personal" film scanners we've reviewed in the past, positioned at the upper end of the "enthusiast" market with a list price as of this writing of $1,299. In many respects, its capabilities reach into the lower end of the "professional" market. We see it fitting the needs of users ranging from well-heeled photo enthusiasts, to businesses and professional photographers looking for top performance on a budget. In support of this market, we found the Dimage software did a particularly good job of providing the power demanded by pros, while remaining very approachable for the amateur.

  

"High Points" Overview

 

* 12-bit digitization, 3.6 Dmax

* 2820 dpi resolution

* User interface accommodates both beginners and experienced users

* "Preview" function can pre-scan entire APS film roll

* Cold-cathode light source for long bulb life

  

EZ-Print Page

In response to reader requests, we now provide copies of all reviews stripped of all their formatting, to faciliate printing. Click here to go to the EZ-Print page.

The Basics

The Dimage Scan Speed is a desktop device about the size of a hefty novel standing on edge. (The long side down.) It measures 3.6 x 6.3 x 10.7 inches (90.5 x 160.5 x 272 mm), and weighs about 4.4 pounds (2 kg). Interface to the host computer is via a high-speed SCSI-2 interface, meaning you'll need to have such a port installed in your computer to use it. (Macs typically come equipped with SCSI connections: On a Windows machine, you'll need to have an interface card installed. Appropriate cards range from $100 to $300 in price. The manual lists a number of Adaptec SCSI cards from the 1500 and 2900 series that are suitable. The only restriction seems to be that the 1500-series boards don't work with NEC PC98xx computers.) The standard unit can scan 35mm negatives or slides, in either black and white or color. An optional APS adapter is available for scanning that film type.

The software CD shipped with the unit supports both Mac and Windows platforms. Standalone scanning applications are provided for both platforms, as well as a Photoshop acquire plug-in for the Mac, and TWAIN drivers for the PC. (NOTE: Minolta specifies that the scanner requires either Windows '95 release 2 (OSR2), or Windows '98. If you're running Windows '95, be sure to check the revision level you have installed.)

Scanning resolution can be as high as 2820 dpi (a 2700-element CCD covering the width of a 35mm slide or negative). This produces maximum image sizes of 2688x4032 pixels for 35mm (32.5 megabytes), or 1920x3328 for APS (19.2 megabytes).

A note about scanner resolution, as compared to that of digital cameras: The 10.8 megapixel resolution of the Dimage Scan Speed is even higher than you might expect, when compared to the resolution of a digital camera. Because the scanner's CCD samples each pixel in all three red, green, and blue color channels, it's really equivalent to a digital camera with a 32 megapixel sensor and "striped" color filters. Thus, the first thing most people notice about images scanned from negatives and slides is the extraordinary level of detail captured. That said, the Dimage Scan Speed's scan resolution of 2820 dpi is at the top of the field for 35mm/APS scanners.

Another important scanning parameter is "bit depth," a measure of both color accuracy and the maximum density range the scanner can recognize. (8 bits per channel is good, 10 better, and 12 the best you'll commonly find in desktop scanners.) The Dimage Scan Speed captures a full 12 bits per pixel.

Scanner Optics & Light Path

Film scanners tend to take one of two approaches in their optical design, providing either fixed or adjustable focus. The Dimage Scan Speed employs fixed-focus optics. Given the extreme resolution of most film scanners, we're surprised that the lenses can be designed with enough depth of field to insure sharp focus in the face of minor variations in the film plane position. We're surprised, but the fixed-focus approach nonetheless seems to work quite well, as evidenced by the performance of the Dimage Scan Speed. The upside of fixed-focus designs of course, is that you don't have to worry about focusing, either in the form of twiddling a thumbwheel, or by waiting while the scanner adjusts its focus for every scan. In our testing, the Dimage Scan Speed produced sharp images every time, the sole exclusion being one orientation of our unusual "USAF 1951" resolution target, which is a glass slide with the pattern deposited on one side of it. With the pattern facing one way, we got sharp results, but decidedly blurry ones with it facing the other. We saw no evident focus deficiencies while scanning normal slides or negatives.

The Dimage Scan Speed uses a special fluorescent light source, producing strong spectral peaks in the red, green, and blue portions of the spectrum. We observed that this diffuse illumination source produced somewhat "softer" scans than some other scanners. The resulting scans had less of a razors-edge on fine detail, but were also much more forgiving of film defects and film grain. A good analogy (for those old darkroom aficionados out there) would be the difference between condenser and diffusion enlargers: The condenser optics tend to produce sharper images, but at the cost of greatly enhanced grain, while diffusion enlargers create a softer look. Note in this though, that while the scans produced by the Dimage Scan Speed have a somewhat "softer" appearance to them, they in fact appear to carry an extremely high level of detail, as evidenced by the results from our WG-18 (ISO-12233) resolution target scans.

Film Handling

The Dimage Scan Speed uses plastic slide- and filmstrip-holders to carry the film to the scanner: You first place the media to be scanned into the holder, then insert the holder into the scanner. The holders have detent notches on them that provide repeatable film positioning, and yet allow for manual advance of the film between frames. During scanning, the holder and film is moved past a fixed CCD array. The filmstrip holder can accommodate strips of 35mm film up to six frames in length, and the slide holder up to four slides. Both holders are reversible, a necessary feature for their use: Inserted into the scanner, you can access half of the total film frames by sliding the adapter in or out. To reach the remaining frames, you remove the adapter, flip it end for end, and reinsert it.

We found both the slide and film holders to be quite effective and easy to use. The film adapter is hinged, but only to the extent that a plate flips up to expose the recess into which the film is laid. (Unlike many "clamshell" designs, the slot holding the film is a fixed structure.) The back pressure plate then hinges back down and latches, clamping the film flat. This arrangement did a particularly good job of handling curled or damaged film, regardless of whether the film was curled side-to-side, or along its length. The film-holding slot is about a half-millimeter wider than the film itself, doing a good job of constraining the film position, yet still allowing minor adjustments to be made for fine alignment relative to the limits of the scanning area. We did find that the filmstrip holder crops the 35mm frame very slightly, about 3% in both vertical and horizontal directions by our reckoning. (For some reason, this appears to be a common characteristic of strip-film holders.)

The slide holder is also constructed of plastic, with four slots along the top edge into which the slides may be loaded. The edges of each slot set absolute limits for the horizontal position of the slide mount, but there's a bit more play (about a full millimeter side-to-side) with slides than is present in the filmstrip adapter. This is probably a good thing, as it allows you to correct for film misaligned in its mount: You can manually tweak the slides to achieve about two degrees of rotation in either direction, as needed. (Despite this looseness, we had no difficulty aligning slides square to the holder, as the edges of the "windows" in the holder provided good reference surfaces to align to, and simply "bottoming out" the slide in the slot yielded good alignment if the film was properly positioned in the slide mount.) The slide holder is also a little unusual in the way that the slides "float" between two sets of spring-loaded fingers. This seemed to do a good job of keeping the film plane well-centered about the point of optimum focus. The centering fingers gripped a particularly thick plastic-and-glass slide mount quite a bit more firmly than they did standard cardboard ones, but handled a wide range of mounts well. System Interface and Included Software

The Dimage Scan Speed uses a SCSI-2 connection to the host computer, providing the high speed data transfer necessary to handle the large amounts of data the scanner can generate. No SCSI card is included with the unit, but Minolta lists several models of Adaptec cards that the unit can be used with. (Adaptec is pretty much the standard for SCSI cards: You can find cheaper ones, but the Adaptec models are more likely to be compatible with a wide range of equipment. Note in particular, that some scanners, CD-ROM drives, and other equipment ships with low-cost SCSI cards included. In many cases, these are "dedicated" cards, that will only run the particular device they're shipped with. If you're buying a card to support the Dimage Scan Speed, take our advice and get a "name brand" Adaptec unit. The hassle you'll save will be more than worth it!)

Once connected to the computer, the Dimage Scan Speed is controlled through an excellent software interface that we'll describe in greater detail below. As noted earlier, the scanner-control software takes the form of standalone applications on both the Mac and PC, as well as a Photoshop plug-in on the Mac, and a TWAIN component on the PC. A particular strength of the Dimage software is the extent to which it provides powerful controls for experienced users, while at the same time offering a simple interface for novices.

A nice touch in the Dimage Scan Speed package was the inclusion of Adobe's Photoshop LE, for both Mac and Windows. Photoshop LE is a slightly trimmed-down version of the full Photoshop package, the primary omissions being support for color spaces other than RGB (such as CMYK, for commercial offset printing), and less in the way of color management. At one time, it was quite common to find Photoshop LE or even a full version of Photoshop bundled with many scanning devices. The combination of policy changes at Adobe (implemented in the form of radically higher prices to their bundling partners), and ever-tightening margins and declining retail prices in the scanner market have all but eliminated Photoshop from the "bundle" market. We applaud Minolta's inclusion of this program with the Dimage Scan Speed though: We suspect that many potential purchasers of the Scan Speed will be upgrading their imaging capability with the acquisition, and won't already have a copy of Photoshop. While trimmed-down somewhat from the capabilities of the full version, Photoshop LE is a dramatic step up from the "dumbed-down" interface and capabilities of Adobe's PhotoDeluxe, a much more common software bundle component these days. Don't get us wrong, PhotoDeluxe is an excellent program, but is clearly targeted at the casual user. Even at that though, we've long felt that removing key features such as the "levels" control is no gift to the end-user. While it may make the program easier to use, such simplification ultimately leaves users at a dead end, with nowhere to go as their skills and abilities improve. Photoshop LE is adequate to the needs of most semi-pro users, and will provide the full range of capabilities that most users will need to achieve the best results. Flame off for now, but repeated kudos to Minolta for taking the cost hit and including Photoshop LE with the scanner. One parting shot: You can't buy Photoshop LE, only the full version of Photoshop, which routinely sells for well over $500. Given that the LE version will be enough for the majority of users, the argument could be made that its inclusion in the Dimage Scan Speed bundle will save many people $500 or more. This fact alone is a significant differentiator for the Minolta's product.

Speeds and Feeds

As its name suggests, the Dimage Scan Speed is intended to be a fast scanner. In our testing, we found that it did indeed zip along pretty quickly. This appeared to be due partly to the basic mechanism and electronics (which moves the film and digests the data rapidly), and partly to the fixed-focus optics: When you tell the unit to begin scanning, there's no delay for focus adjustment before the scan starts. The unit does make one pass over the negative or slide first though, to determine an autoexposure level, a process that takes 4-5 seconds. Scanning throughput was quite good with the unit, helped by the flexible, easy-to-use software, but also by the fast scan times themselves. (We haven't in the past explicitly measured preview and scan times, so won't have comparable numbers for many scanners we've previously tested. From this point on though, we'll begin measuring these throughput-related timings on a routine basis...) Running the Dimage Scan Speed from an Adaptec SCSI card on our 350 MHz Pentium-II Windows machine, we measured the following scan times:

  

Preview/Scan Times:

 

Preview w/autoexposure:

20 seconds

 

Preview w/o autoexposure:

16 seconds

 

Low res (~600dpi) full-frame scan:

21 seconds

 

Full res (2820 dpi) full-frame scan:

44 seconds

     

Operation and User Interface

Other than the actual scans themselves, most of the story to be told about a film scanner has to do with the software that drives it, and to what extent the combination of hardware and software makes it easy to produce good-quality scans. Accordingly, we'll devote a sizable of this review to talking about the software that drives Minolta's Dimage family of scanners, and the Dimage Scan Speed in particular.

As noted several times already, we feel that Minolta has done a particularly good job of balancing capability with ease-of-use. This is a difficult equation to optimize, as the needs of "beginners" and "experts" can vary so widely. At the same time, the goal should be to provide a smooth gradation of capability, not introducing any abrupt hurdles to overcome as the users advance in their sophistication. Minolta has accomplished this difficult design goal by providing very basic, visually-oriented contrast/brightness adjustments for neophytes, while at the same time offering fairly sophisticated histogram and tone curve controls for those comfortable with more complex adjustments, and who need the control they provide.

As we write this, we're still searching for our "formula" that works best for scanner reviews, but are generally settling on a format in which we step through the scanner controls in the approximate order that a user would encounter them. (For a more complete walk-through of scanner operation, check out Minolta's excellent web site for their scanners: They've put together a comprehensive "on-line demo" of how the software works.)

The Preview Screen and Command Window

The most basic options and functions of the Dimage Scan Speed scanner are controlled via the Command window, shown below. The Command window contains two list boxes, two status displays, and a total of ten buttons, which we describe below, moving from left to right, top to bottom in the screen shot: (NOTE: This and all screen shots following have been scaled-down to better fit the 'web page -- The actual screens are larger and much more readable!)

   

* Film Format (List Box) - Options are 35mm or APS

* Film Type (List Box) - Options are Slide Film, Color Negative, B/W Negative, B/W Positive

* Current Job Selection (Display window) - Displays currently-chosen "job type", combining both input and output resolutions. (Translating input resolution (at the film) to output resolution (in the file and on paper when printed) is a tough process to make understandable: Minolta's "Job Type" approach does as good a job of this as any approach we've seen thus far.)

* Job Selection Button - Click for a pop-up menu of currently-defined job types, or create your own.

* Status Bar (Display field) - Displays descriptions of controls as your mouse rolls over them, and gives status information during the scan process. (Very handy for interpreting the sometimes-cryptic button icons, before you get used to them.)

* Index Scan Button (APS Only) - Creates thumbnail-sized index scans of an entire APS film roll.

* Prescan Button (APS or 35mm) - Generates a preview scan of the current film frame or slide. Preview scan sizes can be set to large, small, or automatic. Auto fits the scan resolution to the size screen you're working on. Generally, you'll want the largest preview scan you can get, to help in accurately setting white and black points and in adjusting the tone curves.

* Scan Settings Button - Brings up the Scan Settings window (shown at right), where you can manually adjust the input and output scan resolutions and set the units you want to work in (pixels, inches, or cm). NOTE that you can't set the resolution values when your units are set to pixels, as in the screenshot at right.

* Save Index Scan Button - To save time on subsequent scans (as well as provide a useful index of images on your APS rolls), you can save APS index scans to disk.

* Save Job Button - If you've created a custom Scan Settings configuration, you can save it under its own "job type," for immediate recall later.

* Preferences Button - Brings up the Preferences window, described later.

* Rewind Button (APS Only) - Rewinds APS film back into its canister.

* Help - (If you need us to explain what this button does, you probably shouldn't buy the scanner! ;-)

 

Preferences Window

The preferences window (not shown) controls a number of overall settings governing scanner operation. Most people will rarely need to visit this screen, as the default settings will suffice for many applications. About the only control you're likely to need to change with any regularity is the one for Color Depth, and even then, the non-default settings are likely to be useful to only a small cadre of advanced users. Herewith the Preferences functions:

 

* Auto Expose for Slides - This appears to be an overall exposure compensation adjustment for scanning very dense transparencies. It made no perceptible difference with our "train" slide though, perhaps because that slide also includes some very light areas.

* Close Driver After Scanning - This will be most useful when using either a TWAIN or Photoshop acquire module for scanning. It will close the scanning window after each scan, returning you to the host application. (Or to the desktop, if you're running standalone.)

* Prescan Size (Options are Small, Large, or Auto) - You can preset the size of the prescan window, or allow the scanning software to size it to your screen automatically. The last is the easiest, the fixed sizes perhaps being useful if you want to be able to see other windows on your desktop while the scanning software is running.

* Color Depth (Options are 8-bit, 16-bit, and 16-bit linear) - As mentioned earlier, the Dimage Scan Speed is a 12-bit per channel scanner. Since computer displays and most programs can only accept 8 bits per channel, what happens to the rest? Normally (in 8-bit mode), the scanner and scanning software translate the 12-bit data down to the 8-bit final data size, in effect "choosing the best 8 bits." For most uses, this is the easiest and most direct thing to do. For difficult subjects with particularly wide dynamic ranges though, you may want to employ some unusual tonal mapping, to preserve both shadow and highlight detail, or experiment with different approaches after the scan is complete. For these situations, Minolta provides the ability to capture all 12 bits per channel, and store them in a file. Since the TIFF file format only recognizes either 8 or 16 bits per channel, the option which preserves the full 12 bits of original data is labeled "16-bit," even though only 12 bits per channel are actually being stored. It's a little harder to understand the need for the "16-bit linear" option, but perhaps it has some use in scientific applications. What it appears to do is to turn off the analog "gamma" adjustment that takes place prior to the digitization of the image data. The same raw data is being captured, but the distribution of bits across the tone curve is very different. (In general, dark areas look VERY dark with the 16-bit linear option enabled.) As we said, this doesn't appear to be terribly useful for general photographic applications, but could find some use in photogrammetry.

   

APS Settings - not having had the APS attachment to play with, we didn't have an opportunity to experiment with these, and the main manual offered no description. Below are our "best guesses" as to what they do:

 

o Index Scroll Direction (Options are Horizontal or Vertical) - APS pre-scans produce arrays of thumbnail images. This option simply selects whether the display is set to scroll horizontally or vertically as you move through the array of images.

o Index Scan Priority (Options are Speed or Quality) - With up to 40 frames on a roll, you may sometimes prefer a "quick and dirty" pre-scan in order to view all your images quickly. At other times, you may want a higher-quality prescan, to facilitate image adjustments prior to the high-resolution scans themselves. (Note that you don't have to pre-scan the entire roll, if you know which image you're interested in, based on your APS index print: The software apparently displays blank thumbnails as soon as the roll is loaded, allowing you to choose the image you're interested in, based on frame number.)

o Max # of Frames - We're not sure what this control is for, unless it's to restrict the pre-scan operation to the first few frames of a roll

o Auto Film Rewind - Apparently an option to rewind the film back into the cartridge after the scanning is completed.

o Rotate All Frames 180 degrees - Depending on how the APS cartridge loads into the camera, rolls from some models could come out "upside down." This checkbox avoids the need to laboriously flip every individual frame separately.

   

Prescan Window

This window (shown below) is "home base" for the scanning process. From here, you'll launch off into other functions within the software, to adjust color balance, contrast, or tonal range. Controls here also adjust preview orientation, data readout, and exposure parameters for sequential scans. See the text following the screen shot for a description of the individual buttons and controls.