View allAll Photos Tagged capable

Land Rover has a long history of delivering capable and premium offroad vehicles. The Range Rover has set the benchmark for premium offroad (now known as SUV) vehicle types. And, the original Land Rover (recently known as 'Defender') has set the benchmark for capable offroad attributes since its inception in 1948.

 

One thing the Defender isn't is comfortable, stylish, safe or pretty much anything you would use to describe a newly engineered car. Problem is, Land Rover has not been able to identify and produce a replacement vehicle design.

 

A few years ago Land Rover produced a series of concepts, under the title DC 100 (Defender Concept 100) looking at a modern interpretation of the core Land Rover values: offroad capability & robustness.

 

The version shown here was a followup concept, based on the three door DC 100 design.

 

The production version of this vehicle had been due in 2016/17, but at this stage there is no confirmation regarding the vehicle or the production date.

 

What we are left with are some interesting concepts glimpsing the thoughts of one of the original offroad capable product companies.

 

More info can be found at the following wikipedia link:

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_DC100

 

This Lego miniland-scale Land Rover DC 100 Concept - has been created for Flickr LUGNuts' 105th Build Challenge, titled - 'The Great Outdoors!' - a challenge for any vehicle designed for outdoor adventuring.

  

The display reads:

 

ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster

 

Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.

 

However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.

 

Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.

 

Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.

 

On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.

 

The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.

 

M42 Duster Specifications:

 

Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded

Height: 9 feet 4 inches

Length: 19 feet

Width: 10 feet 7 inches

Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners

Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds

Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun

Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine

Range: 100 miles

Speed 45 mph

 

The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.

 

The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.

 

Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.

 

Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.

 

Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.

 

SGT Mitchell Stout

C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge

 

The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:

 

Citation:

 

Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.

 

Taken December 13th, 2013.

The F-105 Thunderchief, which would become a legend in the history of the Vietnam War, started out very modestly as a proposal for a large, supersonic replacement for the RF-84F Thunderflash tactical reconnaissance fighter in 1951. Later this was expanded by Republic’s famous chief designer, Alexander Kartveli, to a nuclear-capable, high-speed, low-altitude penetration tactical fighter-bomber which could also replace the F-84 Thunderstreak.

 

The USAF liked the idea, as the F-84 had shown itself to be at a disadvantage against Chinese and Soviet-flown MiG-15s over Korea, and ordered 200 of the new design before it was even finalized. This order was reduced to only 37 aircraft with the end of the Korean War, but nonetheless the first YF-105A Thunderchief flew in October 1955. Although it was equipped with an interim J57 engine and had drag problems, it still achieved supersonic speed. When the design was further refined as the YF-105B, with the J75 engine and area ruling, it went over Mach 2. This was in spite of the fact that the design had mushroomed in size from Kartveli’s initial idea to one of the largest and heaviest fighter ever to serve with the USAF: fully loaded, the F-105 was heavier than a B-17 bomber. The USAF ordered 1800 F-105s, though this would be reduced to 830 examples.

 

Almost immediately, the F-105 began to be plagued with problems. Some of the trouble could be traced to the normal teething problems of any new aircraft, but for awhile it seemed the Thunderchief was too hot to handle, with a catastrophically high accident rate. This led to the aircraft getting the nickname of “Thud,” supposedly for the sound it made when hitting the ground, along with other not-so-affectionate monikers such as “Ultra Hog” and “Squat Bomber.” Despite its immense size and bad reputation, however, the F-105 was superb at high speeds, especially at low level, was difficult to stall, and its cockpit was commended for its ergonomic layout. Earlier “narrow-nose” F-105Bs were replaced by wider-nosed, radar-equipped F-105Ds, the mainline version of the Thunderchief, while two-seat F-105Fs were built as conversion trainers.

 

Had it not been for the Vietnam War, however, the F-105 might have gone down in history as simply another mildly successful 1950s era design. Deployed to Vietnam at the beginning of the American involvement there in 1964, the Thunderchief was soon heading to North Vietnam to attack targets there in the opening rounds of Operation Rolling Thunder; this was in spite of the fact that the F-105 was designed primarily as a low-level (and, as its pilots insisted, one-way) tactical nuclear bomber. Instead, F-105s were heading north festooned with conventional bombs.

 

As Rolling Thunder gradually expanded to all of North Vietnam, now-camouflaged Thuds “going Downtown” became iconic, fighting their way through the densest concentration of antiaircraft fire in history, along with SAMs and MiG fighters. The F-105 now gained a reputation for something else: toughness, a Republic hallmark. Nor were they defenseless: unlike the USAF’s primary fighter, the F-4 Phantom II, the F-105 retained an internal 20mm gatling cannon, and MiG-17s which engaged F-105s was far from a foregone conclusion, as 27 MiGs were shot down by F-105s for the loss of about 20. If nothing else, Thud pilots no longer burdened with bombs could simply elect to head home at Mach 2 and two thousand feet, outdistancing any MiG defenders.

 

If the Thud had any weakness, it was its hydraulic system, which was found to be extremely vulnerable to damage. However, it was likely more due to poor tactics and the restrictive Rules of Engagement, which sent F-105s into battle on predictable routes, unable to return fire on SAM sites until missiles were launched at them, and their F-4 escorts hamstrung by being forced to wait until MiGs were on attack runs before the MiGs could be engaged. The tropical climate also took a toll on man and machine, with the end result that 382 F-105s were lost over Vietnam, nearly half of all Thuds ever produced and the highest loss rate of any USAF aircraft.

The combination of a high loss rate and the fact that the F-105 really was not designed to be used in the fashion it was over Vietnam led to the type’s gradual withdrawal after 1968 in favor of more F-4s and a USAF version of the USN’s A-7 Corsair II. An improved all-weather bombing system, Thunderstick II, was given to a few of the F-105D survivors, but this was not used operationally.

 

The Thud soldiered on another decade in Air National Guard and Reserve units until February 1984, when the type was finally retired in favor of the F-16, and its spiritual successor, the A-10 Thunderbolt II.

 

This F-105D, 61-0088, was one of the few Thuds never to see combat over Vietnam. Delivered to the 49th TFW at Spangdahlem, West Germany, it served with USAFE until 1967, when it was transferred to McConnell AFB, Kansas to train new F-105 pilots heading to Southeast Asia. With the drawdown of the Thud force, it was transferred to the Air Force Reserve in 1972, and was among the last F-105s to be retired by the USAF in 1982. It was donated to Grissom AFB for display in their airpark a year later.

 

61-0088 sits here looking rather brand-new; it was recently repainted. It carries standard USAF Southeast Asia camouflage, and currently lacks both a tailcode and tail numbers. Previously, this aircraft carried an erroneous "IN" tailcode, but the Indiana ANG never flew F-105s. The yellow ring around the nose usually indicates a Thud assigned to PACAF units, so more than likely 61-0088 will get a Vietnam-assigned wing code. Though the F-105 always looks a little naked without bombs, this aircraft is remarkably well preserved.

The eventlocation of the Swatch Girls Pro seen today on 3nd of June 2011 in Hossegor, France.

 

The world’s top female surfers proved by pairing up grace, strength and talent, that they are capable of taking the sport to new heights.

 

The 2nd SWATCH GIRLS PRO France 2011 in Hossegor delivered a firework of spectacular surfing! Moving through the rounds, the ladies faced strong currents and fast crashing waves. Heat after heat they tackled the rough challenge by laying down outstanding performances with technical, smooth and stylish surfing. Unfortunately last year’s winner and 4-time World Champion Stephanie Gilmore (AUS) and top favourite Coco Ho (HAW) were already eliminated in the early rounds.

 

In the end Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS) defeated Sage Erickson (USA) on an epic final day of competition to win the SWATCH GIRLS PRO France at Seignosse in Hossegor.

 

Both Fitzgibbons and Erickson surfed at their limit on the final day of competition in front of the packed holiday crowd who flocked to the beach to support some of the world’s finest women’s surfers, but it was Fitzgibbons who found the scores needed to take the victory over the American surfer.

 

Fitzgibbons, who is currently rated No. 2 on the elite ASP Women’s World Title Series, competed in her second consecutive SWATCH GIRLS PRO France event and her victory marks her third major ASP win this year.

 

Erickson was impressive throughout the entire competition, eventually defeating Sarah Baum (ZAF) in the Semifinals, but was unable to surpass Fitzgibbons for the win.

 

Sarah Mason Wins 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France

 

Sarah Mason (Gisbourne, NZL) 16, today took out the ASP 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France over Dimity Stoyle (Sunshine Coast QLD, AUS) 19, it a closely contested 35-minute final that went down to the wire in tricky 3ft (1m) waves at Les Bourdaines.

 

Europe’s finest under-21 athletes faced some of the world’s best up-and-comers in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France in their attempt to qualify for the ASP World Junior Series which starts October 3, in Bali, Indonesia.

 

Mason, who impressed the entire event with her precise and stylish forehand attack, left little to chance in the 35-minute final getting off to a quick start to open her account and then built on her two-wave total to claim victory with 11.73 out of 20. The quietly spoken goofy-footer was a standout performer in the ASP 6-Star Swatch Girls Pro France and backed it up with a commanding performance against her fellow Pro Junior members.

 

“It is amazing. I am so happy and it is one of my best results for sure. It was tricky to try and pick the good ones but I picked a couple so it was great. All the girls are definitely ripping so you have to step up the level to get through your heats so I am stoked with the win. It has been super fun and I have enjoyed the entire event so to win is just amazing.”

 

Dimity Stoyle was unable to bridge the gap over her opponent in the final finishing second despite holding priority several times in the later stages of the encounter. The Swatch Girls Pro Junior France has proved the perfect training ground for Stoyle to continue with her excellent results already obtained this season on the ASP Australasia Pro Junior series where she is currently ranked nº2.

 

“I am still happy with second and I really wanted to win here but I tried my best. This is the best event I have been in so far it is really good the set up, the waves and everyone loves it. I can’t believe how good the French crowd are. They love surfing and they love us all so I am definitely going to come back.”

 

Felicity Palmateer (Perth WA, AUS) 18, ranked nº9 on the ASP Women’s Star Tour, finished equal 3rd in a low scoring tactical heat against Stoyle where positioning and priority tactics towards the final part played a major role as the frequency of set waves dropped.

 

“When I first paddled out I thought it was breaking more out the back but as the tide started to change it moved in and became a little inconsistent. At the start of the heat there were heaps of waves but then it went slow and priority came into play and I kept trying to get one. I am not really fussed because I am travelling with Dimity (Stoyle) and stoked that she has made the final.”

 

Palmateer has used the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France as a building block towards her ultimate goal of being full-time on the ASP Women’s World Tour. Her objectives are clear and 2011 is an extremely important year.

 

“I would love to get a World Junior title but at the moment my goal is to qualify for the World Tour through the Star events. If I can get more practice without that much pressure on me like this year and then if I qualify it will be even better for 2012.”

 

Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 17, placed 3rd in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France after failing to oust eventual event winner Sarah Mason in semi-final nº1. Buitendag looked dangerous throughout the final day of competition and was unlucky not to find any quality scoring waves in a slow heat. Trailing for the majority of the encounter, Buitendag secured her best ride in the final moments which proved not enough to advance.

 

“The swell definitely dropped and although the conditions were quite nice I didn’t get any good scoring waves. I have a Pro Junior event coming up in South Africa and it is very important to get a result there to qualify for the World Juniors.”

 

Maud Le Car (St Martin, FRA) 19, claimed the best result of the European contingent finishing equal 5th to jump to nº1 position on the ASP Women’s European Pro Junior series. Le Car led a low scoring quarter-final bout against Bianca Buitendag until losing priority in a tactical error which allowed her opponent to sneak under her guard and claim the modest score required to win.

 

“I didn’t surf really well in that heat and I am a little bit disappointed because it is for the selection to the World Juniors with the other European girls. The waves were not the best and it was difficult to catch some good waves and unfortunately I didn’t make it. It is really good to be at the top but I have some other contests to improve and to do some good results and to make it to the World Juniors.”

 

The Swatch Time to Tear Expression Session was won by the team composed of Swatch Girls Pro France finalists Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS), Sage Erickson (USA) and equal 3rd placed Courtney Conlogue (USA) in a dynamic display of modern progressive surfing in the punchy 3ft peaks in front of a packed surf hungry audience lining the shore.

 

The Swatch Girls Pro is webcast LIVE on www.swatchgirlspro.com

 

For all results, videos, daily highlights, photos and news log-on to www.swatchgirlsproor www.aspeurope.com

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Final Result

Sarah Mason (NZL) 11.73 Def. Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.27

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Semi-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 14.00 Def. Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 9.60

Heat 2: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.67 Def. Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.57

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Quarter-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 12.75 Def. Lakey Peterson (USA) 6.25

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 8.95 Def. Maud Le Car (FRA) 8.50

Heat 3: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 11.00 Def. Georgia Fish (AUS) 4.50

Heat 4: Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 17.00 Def. Nao Omura (JPN) 8.75

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Round Three Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 15.25, Maud Le Car (FRA) 11.00, Marie Dejean (FRA) 9.35, Camille Davila (FRA) 4.90

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 14.50, Lakey Peterson (USA) 11.50, Justine Dupont (FRA) 10.75, Phillipa Anderson (AUS) 5.10

Heat 3: Georgia Fish (AUS) 12.50, Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.15, Joanne Defay (FRA) 7.15, Loiola Canales (EUK) 2.90

Heat 4: Nao Omura (JPN) 10.00, Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 9.50, Barbara Segatto (BRA) 3.90, Ana Morau (FRA) 3.05

 

Photos Aquashot/ASPEurope - Swatch

+++ 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 Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light 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.

 

Skyhawks played key roles in the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Falklands War. Sixty years after the aircraft's first flight in 1954, some of the 2,960 produced (through February 1979). The Skyhawk found many users all around the world, and some still remain in service with the Argentine Air Force and the Brazilian Naval Aviation. Operators in Asia included Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand.

 

Thailand procured the Skyhawk in 1984, for the Royal Thai Navy air arm to be used for naval and air space surveillance, against sea surface targets and for close air support for the Royal Thai Marine Corps. A total of thirty aircraft were purchased from the USA, twenty-four single seaters and six two-seat TA-4J trainers.

 

The single seaters were refurbished A-4Cs from USN overstock, modernized to a standard that came close to the USN’s A-4L, but with some specific differences and unique features that made them suitable for all-weather strike operations. This modified version was re-designated as A-4LT and featured the late Skyhawk versions’ distinct “Camelback” fairing that house the additional avionics as well as a heat exchanger. The most distinctive external difference to any other Skyhawk version was a unique, pointed radome.

 

The update for Thailand included an AN/APQ-126 terrain following radar in the nose, which was integrated into an ILAAS digital navigation system – a very modern system of its era. The radar also fed a navigation and weapons delivery computer which made possible accurate delivery of bombs from a greater stand-off distance, greatly improving survivability.

Further special equipment for the Thai Skyhawks included, among others, a Hughes AN/ASB-19 Angle Rate Bombing System, a Bendix AN/APN-141 Low altitude radar altimeter, an AN/AVQ-7(V) Head Up display (HUD), air refueling capability (with a fixed but detachable refueling probe), a brake parachute housing below the jet pipe, two additional underwing hardpoints (for a total for five, like the A-4E) and an increased payload. Avionics were modernized and expanded, giving the Thai Skyhawks ability to carry modern AIM-9L Sidewinder AAMs and AGM-65 Maverick AGMs. The latter became, beyond standard iron bombs and pods with unguided missiles, the aircrafts’ main armament against naval targets.

However, despite the modernization of the avionics, the A-4LTs retained the A-4Cs’ Wright J65-W-20 engine with 8,200 lbf (36 kN) of takeoff thrust.

 

The first aircraft were delivered in December 1985 to the Royal Thai Navy (RTN / กองทัพเรือไทย / Kong thap ruea thai), carrying a USN grey/white livery. They served in the No.104 RTN Squadron, distributed among two wings based at U-Tapao near Bangkok and at Songkhla in the south of Thailand, close to the Malaysian border. During regular overhauls (executed at Singapore Aircraft Industries, now ST Aerospace), the RTN Skyhawks soon received a new wraparound camouflage with reduced insignia and markings.

 

While in service, the Thai Skyhawks soon suffered from frequent maintenance issues and a low availability rate, since replacement parts for the reliable yet old J65 engine became more and more difficult to obtain. At times, half of the A-4LT fleet had to remain grounded because of engine problems. In consequence, the Thai Skyhawks were in the mid-Nineties supplemented by fourteen Vought A-7E Corsairs (plus four two-seaters) in the coastal defense, sea patrol and anti-shipping role. In 1999, they were retired and replaced by Royal Thai Air Force F-16s.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 40 ft 3 in (12.29 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-20 turbojet with 8,200 lbf (36 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× 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk. 12 cannons in the wing roots, 100 RPG

Total effective payload of up to 7,700 lb (3,500 kg) on five hardpoints

- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lb capability

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

I originally had this project stashed away for the upcoming "1 Week Group Build" at whatifmodelers.com in June 2020, but since the current "In the Navy" GB had some days to go (and even received a two week extension) I decided to tackle this build on short notice.

 

The original idea was simply to build an A-4L, a modernized A-4C for the USN Reserve units, but similar machines had also been exported to Malaysia. For the naval theme I came across the Royal Thai Navy and its A-7E Corsairs - and from that the idea of a Skyhawk predecessor from the Eighties was born.

 

Instead of an A-4C (Fujimi does one in 1:72, but it's a rare kit) I based my build upon the nice Airfix A-4B/Q kit. Its biggest difference is the shorter nose, so that I decided to modify this "flaw" first and added a pointed radome instead of the usual blunt Skyhawk nose; not certain where it came from – it looks very Sea-Harrier-ish, but it’s actually the tip of a large drop tank (Italeri Tornado?). Nevertheless, this small change created a weird look, even more so with the black paint added to it later.

 

Further additions and mods are a dorsal avionics bulge from an Italeri A-4M, a scratched kinked refueling probe (made from wire and white glue, the early Skyhawks had straight probes but this would certainly interfere with the new radar in the nose), a brake parachute fairing under the tail (scratched, too, from sprue material) and additional antennae under the nose and behind the cockpit. Nothing fancy, rather details from more modern Skyhawk versions.

The AGM-65 Maverick missiles and their respective launch rails came from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen, the drop tank on the ventral pylon is OOB.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision. The Thai Corsairs as primary (and historically later) benchmark carried a standard USN grey/white high-viz livery, even though with small roundels. There were also VTOL Harriers (former Spanish Matadors) operated for a short period by the Thai navy on board of the multi-purpose carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet, which wore a darker two-tone grey livery, pretty boring, too. I rather wanted something more exciting (if not exotic), a more modern wraparound scheme, suited for both overwater and high-altitude duties. That brought me to the Thai F-5Ts (a.k.a. Tigris), which carried - among others - a quite unique US export/aggressor scheme in three shades of light grey, including FS 35414, which looked like a pale turquoise on these machines. I furthermore took inspiration by early Indonesian A-4s, which also carried an US export scheme, nicknamed "Grape", which included darker shades of blue, blue-gray and the bright FS 35414, too.

 

I eventually settled upon a compromise between these two liveries and tried to adapt the standard F-5 aggressor camouflage pattern for the A-4, made up from FS 36440 (Light Gull Grey), 35164 (Intermediate Blue) and 35414 (Light Blue). Current Thai L-39 Albatros trainers seem to carry a similar livery, even though I am not certain about the tones that are actually used.

The basic enamel paints I used are Humbrol 129 and 144, and for the greenish Light Blue I used "Fulcrum Grey Green" from Modelmaster (#2134), a tone that is quite greenish but markedly darker and more dull than e.g. Humbrol 65, so that the color would not stand out brightly from the other greys and better fit between them. Worked quite well.

 

The inside of the slats as well as of the air brakes on the flanks were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19), while the landing gear and the interior of the air intake were painted in white (Humbrol 130). The cockpit was painted in a bluish mid grey (Revell 57).

 

After basic overall painting, the model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, for a lightly used/weathered look.

Most decals/markings come from a Thai Harrier (from an Italeri AV-8A kit), some other markings and stencils were puzzled together from the scrap box, e.g. from a USN F-5E aggressor and from a Peruvian Mirage 2000. Some additional details like the black gun soot areas on the wing roots or the fine white lines on the radome were created with generic decal sheet material.

Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish, except for the radome, which became semi-gloss.

  

As intended, this build was realized in just a couple of days - and I am positively surprised how good the Skyhawk looks in its unusual, if not exotic colors! This fictional livery certainly looks different from a potential standard USN grey/white outfit, and more exciting than a dull grey-in-grey livery. And it’s so weird that it even adds some credibility to this whiffy aircraft model. 😉

+++ 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 Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light 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.

 

Skyhawks played key roles in the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Falklands War. Sixty years after the aircraft's first flight in 1954, some of the 2,960 produced (through February 1979). The Skyhawk found many users all around the world, and some still remain in service with the Argentine Air Force and the Brazilian Naval Aviation. Operators in Asia included Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand.

 

Thailand procured the Skyhawk in 1984, for the Royal Thai Navy air arm to be used for naval and air space surveillance, against sea surface targets and for close air support for the Royal Thai Marine Corps. A total of thirty aircraft were purchased from the USA, twenty-four single seaters and six two-seat TA-4J trainers.

 

The single seaters were refurbished A-4Cs from USN overstock, modernized to a standard that came close to the USN’s A-4L, but with some specific differences and unique features that made them suitable for all-weather strike operations. This modified version was re-designated as A-4LT and featured the late Skyhawk versions’ distinct “Camelback” fairing that house the additional avionics as well as a heat exchanger. The most distinctive external difference to any other Skyhawk version was a unique, pointed radome.

 

The update for Thailand included an AN/APQ-126 terrain following radar in the nose, which was integrated into an ILAAS digital navigation system – a very modern system of its era. The radar also fed a navigation and weapons delivery computer which made possible accurate delivery of bombs from a greater stand-off distance, greatly improving survivability.

Further special equipment for the Thai Skyhawks included, among others, a Hughes AN/ASB-19 Angle Rate Bombing System, a Bendix AN/APN-141 Low altitude radar altimeter, an AN/AVQ-7(V) Head Up display (HUD), air refueling capability (with a fixed but detachable refueling probe), a brake parachute housing below the jet pipe, two additional underwing hardpoints (for a total for five, like the A-4E) and an increased payload. Avionics were modernized and expanded, giving the Thai Skyhawks ability to carry modern AIM-9L Sidewinder AAMs and AGM-65 Maverick AGMs. The latter became, beyond standard iron bombs and pods with unguided missiles, the aircrafts’ main armament against naval targets.

However, despite the modernization of the avionics, the A-4LTs retained the A-4Cs’ Wright J65-W-20 engine with 8,200 lbf (36 kN) of takeoff thrust.

 

The first aircraft were delivered in December 1985 to the Royal Thai Navy (RTN / กองทัพเรือไทย / Kong thap ruea thai), carrying a USN grey/white livery. They served in the No.104 RTN Squadron, distributed among two wings based at U-Tapao near Bangkok and at Songkhla in the south of Thailand, close to the Malaysian border. During regular overhauls (executed at Singapore Aircraft Industries, now ST Aerospace), the RTN Skyhawks soon received a new wraparound camouflage with reduced insignia and markings.

 

While in service, the Thai Skyhawks soon suffered from frequent maintenance issues and a low availability rate, since replacement parts for the reliable yet old J65 engine became more and more difficult to obtain. At times, half of the A-4LT fleet had to remain grounded because of engine problems. In consequence, the Thai Skyhawks were in the mid-Nineties supplemented by fourteen Vought A-7E Corsairs (plus four two-seaters) in the coastal defense, sea patrol and anti-shipping role. In 1999, they were retired and replaced by Royal Thai Air Force F-16s.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 40 ft 3 in (12.29 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-20 turbojet with 8,200 lbf (36 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× 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk. 12 cannons in the wing roots, 100 RPG

Total effective payload of up to 7,700 lb (3,500 kg) on five hardpoints

- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lb capability

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

I originally had this project stashed away for the upcoming "1 Week Group Build" at whatifmodelers.com in June 2020, but since the current "In the Navy" GB had some days to go (and even received a two week extension) I decided to tackle this build on short notice.

 

The original idea was simply to build an A-4L, a modernized A-4C for the USN Reserve units, but similar machines had also been exported to Malaysia. For the naval theme I came across the Royal Thai Navy and its A-7E Corsairs - and from that the idea of a Skyhawk predecessor from the Eighties was born.

 

Instead of an A-4C (Fujimi does one in 1:72, but it's a rare kit) I based my build upon the nice Airfix A-4B/Q kit. Its biggest difference is the shorter nose, so that I decided to modify this "flaw" first and added a pointed radome instead of the usual blunt Skyhawk nose; not certain where it came from – it looks very Sea-Harrier-ish, but it’s actually the tip of a large drop tank (Italeri Tornado?). Nevertheless, this small change created a weird look, even more so with the black paint added to it later.

 

Further additions and mods are a dorsal avionics bulge from an Italeri A-4M, a scratched kinked refueling probe (made from wire and white glue, the early Skyhawks had straight probes but this would certainly interfere with the new radar in the nose), a brake parachute fairing under the tail (scratched, too, from sprue material) and additional antennae under the nose and behind the cockpit. Nothing fancy, rather details from more modern Skyhawk versions.

The AGM-65 Maverick missiles and their respective launch rails came from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen, the drop tank on the ventral pylon is OOB.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision. The Thai Corsairs as primary (and historically later) benchmark carried a standard USN grey/white high-viz livery, even though with small roundels. There were also VTOL Harriers (former Spanish Matadors) operated for a short period by the Thai navy on board of the multi-purpose carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet, which wore a darker two-tone grey livery, pretty boring, too. I rather wanted something more exciting (if not exotic), a more modern wraparound scheme, suited for both overwater and high-altitude duties. That brought me to the Thai F-5Ts (a.k.a. Tigris), which carried - among others - a quite unique US export/aggressor scheme in three shades of light grey, including FS 35414, which looked like a pale turquoise on these machines. I furthermore took inspiration by early Indonesian A-4s, which also carried an US export scheme, nicknamed "Grape", which included darker shades of blue, blue-gray and the bright FS 35414, too.

 

I eventually settled upon a compromise between these two liveries and tried to adapt the standard F-5 aggressor camouflage pattern for the A-4, made up from FS 36440 (Light Gull Grey), 35164 (Intermediate Blue) and 35414 (Light Blue). Current Thai L-39 Albatros trainers seem to carry a similar livery, even though I am not certain about the tones that are actually used.

The basic enamel paints I used are Humbrol 129 and 144, and for the greenish Light Blue I used "Fulcrum Grey Green" from Modelmaster (#2134), a tone that is quite greenish but markedly darker and more dull than e.g. Humbrol 65, so that the color would not stand out brightly from the other greys and better fit between them. Worked quite well.

 

The inside of the slats as well as of the air brakes on the flanks were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19), while the landing gear and the interior of the air intake were painted in white (Humbrol 130). The cockpit was painted in a bluish mid grey (Revell 57).

 

After basic overall painting, the model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, for a lightly used/weathered look.

Most decals/markings come from a Thai Harrier (from an Italeri AV-8A kit), some other markings and stencils were puzzled together from the scrap box, e.g. from a USN F-5E aggressor and from a Peruvian Mirage 2000. Some additional details like the black gun soot areas on the wing roots or the fine white lines on the radome were created with generic decal sheet material.

Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish, except for the radome, which became semi-gloss.

  

As intended, this build was realized in just a couple of days - and I am positively surprised how good the Skyhawk looks in its unusual, if not exotic colors! This fictional livery certainly looks different from a potential standard USN grey/white outfit, and more exciting than a dull grey-in-grey livery. And it’s so weird that it even adds some credibility to this whiffy aircraft model. 😉

Eighth church on this 2021 Heritage/Ride and Stride Weekend, and all previous seven were open.

 

Which is worth pointing out, is unprecedented.

 

In fact, all 9 were open, some new and some, like Oare, revisits, but all worth doing.

 

St Peter is small and simple, a fine church overlooking Faversham Creek, on the edge of the once unhealthy marshes, now on a road that no longer leads to a ferry to Harty, but to a nature reserve.

 

I was greeted by a fine pair of ladies, who welcomed me as though I had cycled, and ensured the lights were put on inside.

 

Highlight is the modern glass with a representation of a Mulberry Harbour, as the designer of the road access part lived in the parish.

 

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

 

St Peter’s Oare, a Grade I listed building, is often described as a ‘mainly 13th century church’ – which it is. However, the view that confronts the visitor entering the churchyard gate is pure Victoriana, the work of diocesan architect Joseph Clarke, an example of the sympathetic restoration of which not all Victorians were capable.

 

Indeed, it is this west elevation, with its louvred bell-tower and cedar-shingled spirelet, that is St Peter’s to visitors, artists and photographers.

 

The building could hardly be better sited. It stands where village becomes countryside, set inconspicuously back from a road that leads only to the broadening waters of the Swale and their marshland bird-life. In the churchyard, a few mature trees remain of those that once cast gloom over church and graves. They rise from among ancient headstones and ivy-clad tombs, providing summer shade for those who want to enjoy the panoramic views over Oare Creek and acre upon distant acre of marsh pastures with the North Downs as a backdrop. With binoculars or good eyesight you can rest on one of the conveniently located benches and count how many far-off churches you can pick out from this elevated point of vantage.

 

But how old is the church? you ask. Everyone seems to. To this there is no categorical answer. Today the building is little changed since the 1860s restoration and yet there was a church here when the Domesday Book was penned – well, half a church, but which half our Norman forebears didn’t say. A church half-finished? Or a church part-razed by the tempests of that tempestuous age?

 

What we do know is that the chancel was extended eastwards in the late 14th or early 15th century, and some time thereafter the old east window was taken out and replaced by a larger one in the Perpendicular style. The actual glass is more recent – the work of F.C. Eden. It was given in memory of artist Francis Forster, a casualty of WWI. Another window by this noted London artisan, on the north wall, commemorates another war victim. Below it a memorial slab set into the frame of this once tall lancet window names those who died in the great explosion of 1916, when the marshes throbbed with a wartime industry of munitions manufacture.

 

Back in the secluded peace of this village church is one treasured rarity, a square font of Purbeck marble from the late Norman/Early English period. Its sides were once elaborately carved, but many years ago it went missing, only to be recovered decades later from a nearby pond, somewhat the worse for its immersion. Was it concealed from Cromwell’s ravaging iconoclasts? No one knows. This hazy fact must take its place with the many mysteries hidden among the pages of time. But is it not these undocumented secrets that make a church like St Peter’s so alluring? Who can tell when the truth will emerge and another page of history can be written?

 

www.thekingsdownandcreeksidecluster.co.uk/?page_id=683

 

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

 

A small Norman church overlooking Oare Creek with fine views to the east. Built of flint with Victorian additions by Joseph Clarke, the exterior is dominated by lively painted spirelet and south porch and muscular buttresses. Inside, a simple view with no chancel arch is enlivened by a Norman font, simple Victorian pulpit and fine stained glass windows by F C Eden. The west window – an oculus – contains the date 1867 recording the restoration of the church. A plaque commemorates those who lost their lives in one of the explosions at the nearby Gunpowder factory in 1916. The overall impression is of a lovingly cared for church, mirroring the lives of generations of Oare folk and it is highly recommended.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Oare

 

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

 

ORE

LIES the next parish north westward from Davington, and is so called from the etymology of it in the Saxon language, signifying a fenny or marshy place.

 

This parish is a very low situation, at the very edge of the marshes, it is consequently but little known or frequented, its vicinity to the marshes, and its low and watry situation, make it very unhealthy, so that it is but very thinly inhabited, but the lands are very rich and fertile, the waters of the Swale are its northern boundaries; on its south it rises up towards Bysing-wood, from which it is distant about a mile. The village is occupied by a few fishermen and oyster dredgers, situated near the middle of the parish on a small ascent, having the church about a quarter of a mile to the north-westward of it, and Ore-court at the like distance, at the edge of the marshes. The creek, which is navigable up to the village, whence it runs north-east, and at a little more than half a mile's distance joins the Faversham creek, and flows with it about the like distance, till it meets the waters of the Swale.

 

Several scarce plants have been observed in this parish by Mr. Jacob, who has enumerated them among his Plantæ Favershamienses, to which book the reader is referred for a list of them.

 

THE MANOR of Ore was part of the vast possessions of Odo, bishop of Baieux, and earl of Kent, the Conqueror's half-brother, under the general title of whose lands it is thus entered in the general survey of Domesday:

 

In Lest de Wiwarlet. In Favreshant hundered, Adam holds of the bishop (of Baieux) Ore. It was taxed at two sulings. The arable lands are four carucates. In demesne there is one, and ten villeins, with ten borderers, having two carucates. There is half a church, and one mill of twenty-two shillings, and two fisheries without tallage, and one salt-pit of twenty-eight pence. Wood for the pannage of six bogs. In the time of king Edward the Confessor it was worth four pounds, and afterwards sixty shillings, now one hundred shillings. Turgis held it of king Edward.

 

And a little afterwards there is another entry as follows:

 

Adam holds of the bishop one yoke in Ore, and it was taxed at one yoke. The arable land is one carucate. Four villeins now hold this to ferme, and pay twenty shillings, and it was worth so much separately. There is a church. Leunold held it of king Edward.

 

Four years after the taking of the above survey, the bishop of Baieux was disgraced, and all his possessions were consiscated to the crown.

 

Upon which the manor of Ore came to be held immediately, or in capite of the king, by the beforementioned. Adam de Port, of whose heirs it was afterwards again held by Arnulf Kade, who gave this manor, with that of Stalishfield, and their appurtenances, to the knights hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, and it was assigned by them to the jurisdiction of their preceptory, established at Swingfield.

 

The manor of Ore continued part of the possessions of these knights till the general dissolution of their hospital in the 32d year of Henry VIII. when this order was suppressed by an act then specially passed for that purpose. (fn. 1)

 

This manor seems to have remained in the hands of the crown till king Edward VI. granted it in his 5th year, to Edward, lord Clinton and Say, who next year re-conveyed it back again to the king. (fn. 2)

 

How it passed from the crown afterwards I have not found, but that at length it came into the possession of the family of Monins, and thence by sale to that of Short, one of which, Samuel Short, esq. owned it in 1722, and it continued down in his descendants to Philip Short, esq. who was succeeded in it by Mr. Charles Maples Short, who died a few years ago at Jamaica, on which it became vested in Mr. Humphry Munn, gent. in right of Lydia Short his wife. Hence it passed by sale to Mr. Bonnick Lipyeatt, who died in 1789, leaving two daughters his coheirs, who married Mr. Charles Brooke, of London, and Mr. Gosselin, and entitled them respectively to this estate.

 

A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

There are noparochial charities. The poor constantly relieved here are not more than two; casually about six.

 

ORE is within the ECCLESTASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Ospringe.

 

The church which is dedicated to St. Peter, is a small building, of one isle and one chancel, having a pointed steeple at the west end, in which are two bells.

 

This church, which was antiently accounted only as a chapel to that of Stalisfield, belonged to the priory of St. Gregory, in Canterbury, perhaps part of its orignal endowment by archbishop Lanfranc, in the time of the Conqueror, and it was confirmed to it, among its other possessions, by archbishop Hubert, about the reign of king Richard I.

 

In the 8th year of Richard II. there was a yearly pension paid from the church of Ore, of ten shillings to the priory of Rochester, and another of eight shilling to that of Leeds. (fn. 3)

 

This church remained part of the possessions of the priory of St. Gregory, till the dissolution of it in the reign of Henry VIII. in the 27th year of which, an act having passed for the suppression of all such religious houses, whose revenues did not amount to the clear yearly value of two hundred pounds, this priory was thereby dissolved, and the scite of it, together with all its lands, possessions, and revenues, surrendered into the king's hands, by John Symkins, prior of it.

 

The church of Ore remained with the other possessions of the priory in the crown but a small time, for an act passed that year to enable the king and the archbishop of Canterbury to exchange the scite of the late dissolved priory of St. Radigund near Dover, with all its possessions, lately given by the king to the archbishop, for the scite of the late dissolved priory of St. Gregory, and all the possessions belonging to it, excepting the manor of Howfield, in Chartham.

 

After which the parsonage of this church was demised by the archbishop, as it has been since by his successors, among the rest of the revenues of the priory of St. Gregory, from time to time, in one great lease, (in which all advowsons and nominations to churches and chapels have constantly been excepted) in which state it continues at this time. George Gipps, esq. of Harbledown, M.P. is the present lessee of then to the archbishop, and Mr. John Hope, of Ore, is the present leffee under him for the parsonage of this church, at the yearly rent of thirty-four pounds.

 

It pays, procurations to the archdecaon five shillings, and to the archbishop at his visitaiton two shillings. When the church of Ore was separated from that of Stalisfield, I have not found, but it has long been an independent church of itself.

 

It was, long before the dissolution of the priory of St. Gregory, served as a curacy by the religious of it; since which it has been esteemed as a perpetual curacy, of the patronage of the successive archbishops of Canterbury, and continues to at this time. In 1640 the communicants here were forty-seven.

 

The lessee of the parsonage pays the curate, by the convenants of his lease, the yearly sum of fifteen pounds.

 

¶Before the year 1755, it had been augmented by the governors of queen Anne's bounty with the sum of two hundred pounds, and divine service was performed here only once a fortnight; since which it has been augmented with 1000l. more, and it is now performed here once a week. Of the above sum of 1200l. in the year 1764, 260l. were laid out in the purchase of an estate, of a house, buildings, and twenty-two acres of land, in Ospringe; and in 1770, another estate was purchased, consisting of a house, buildings, and thirty-three acres of land, in Boughton under Blean. The remaining 280l. yet remain in the governors hands.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol6/pp381-386

Waiting in the rain & in vain for 60103 Flying Scotsman at Ampthill Crossing 4/11/2017 (It was 25 minutes earlier than scThe British Rail Class 222 is a diesel multiple unit high-speed train capable of 125 mph (200 km/h). Twenty-seven units have been built in Belgium by Bombardier Transportation.

 

The Class 222 is similar to the Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 Super Voyager trains used by CrossCountry and Virgin Trains, but it has a different interior. The Class 222 trains have more components fitted under the floors to free up space within the body. Since 2009 East Midlands Trains has been the only train operating company using Class 222s.

All coaches are equipped with a Cummins QSK19 diesel engine of 750 hp (560 kW) at 1800 rpm.[2] This powers a generator, which supplies current to motors driving two axles per coach. Approximately 1,350 miles (2,170 km) can be travelled between each refuelling.

 

Class 222 have rheostatic braking using the motors in reverse to generate electricity which is dissipated as heat through resistors situated on the roof of each coach; this saves on brake pad wear.

 

In common with the Class 220s, B5000 lightweight bogies are used - these are easily recognisable since the entire outer surface of the wheel is visible, with inboard axle bearings.

 

The Class 222 are fitted with Dellner couplers,[3] as on Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 SuperVoyager trains,[3] though these units cannot work together in service because the Class 222 electrical connections are incompatible with the Class 220 and Class 221 trains.[3][clarification needed]

 

All Class 222 units are maintained at the dedicated Etches Park depot in Derby, just south of Derby station.

 

Formation[edit]

 

Seven car length Class 222 No. 222003 at London St Pancras

 

Five car length Class 222 No. 222016 at Bedford

Class 222 units are currently running in the following formations:

 

East Midlands Trains: seven cars with 236 standard seats and 106 first-class seats.

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class

Coach C - Standard Class

Coach D - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach F - First Class

Coach G - First Class

Coach H - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

East Midlands Trains: five cars with 192 standard seats and 50 first-class seats

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class

Coach C - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite

Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

East Midlands Trains: four cars with 132 standard seats and 33 first-class seats

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite

Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

The four- and five-car units can be coupled to form 9/10-car services at peak times. When coupled together, coaches A-G are found in the front unit and the rear coaches become labelled J, K, L, M, N, with the first-class seats in coaches J and K.

 

Initially, the 23 units ordered for Midland Mainline were 4-car and 9-car. Over time these have been gradually modified to the current formations. The 4-car units ordered by Hull Trains had an option when constructed to be extended to 5-cars if required.[4]

East Midlands Trains has named the following Meridians:

 

Unit numberNameDate namedNamed byNotes

222 001The Entrepreneur Express22 September 2011Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed to kick off the start of the 2011 entrepreneur festival MADE

222 002The Cutlers' Company18 October 2011Pamela Liversidge, Master CutlerNamed to mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and Sheffield

222 003Tornado24 March 2009Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorDriving car 60163 named as it has the same number as Tornado

222 004Children's Hospital Sheffield26 February 2013Michael Vaughan, Charity PatonTo mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and the Sheffield Children's Hospital

222 006The Carbon Cutter31 May 2011Philip Hammond, Transport SecretaryTo mark the introduction of eco-mode to the fleet

222 008Derby Etches Park13 September 2014David Horne, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed as part of the open day at Derby Etches Park

222 015175 Years of Derby's Railways 1839 - 201418 July 2014Paul Atterbury, Antiques Roadshow Expert and railway authorTo mark 175 years of railways in Derby

222 022Invest In Nottingham19 September 2011Jon Collins, leader of Nottingham City CouncilNamed to launch the 2011 Invest in Nottingham day

222 011Sheffield City Battalion 1914-191811 November 2014Ron Wiltshire, Royal British Legion representativeNamed to honour Sheffield City Battalion who fought in the World War I

 

East Midlands Trains Class 222/0 No. 222018 at Loughborough.

In 2008 further rearrangements were made to the sets: another carriage was removed from the eight-car Meridians, except for 222 007, which has been reduced to five cars.[6] The surplus coaches were then added to the remaining four-car Meridians to make six seven-car sets (222 001-222 006) and 17 five-car sets (222 007-222 023). This took place from March to October 2008; as part of the process, two first-class coaches removed from 222 007 were converted to standard class and part first class.

 

The seven-car trains are almost exclusively used on the fast services between London St Pancras and Sheffield. These do not operate the London St Pancras-Leeds, although the service is via Sheffield. The five-car trains are mainly used between London St Pancras and Sheffield, Nottingham or Corby on semi-fast services. The four-car trains supplement the five-car trains on these services.

 

In December 2008 the Class 222 Meridians started work on the hourly London St Pancras to Sheffield services, because they have faster acceleration than the High Speed Trains and so were able to reduce the Sheffield to London journey time by 12 minutes. The hourly Nottingham service was then transferred to High Speed Train running to cover for the Meridians now working the hourly Sheffield fast service.[7]

 

In February 2009, 222 101 and 222 102 transferred from Hull Trains to East Midlands Trains, and were quickly repainted in the East Midlands Trains white livery. 222 104 followed from Hull Trains later in the year. 222 103 followed a few months after 222 104 after repairs had been completed (see below). 222 103 has now been reinstated for service after two years for repairs after the unit fell from jacks at Bombardier, Crofton in early 2007.

heduled and sitting in my car it passed by heard but not seen)

 

Geralt: As capable soldiers, I'm sure the Blue Stripes aren't behind inciting the people against magic-users. But I will need to see your spymaster.

Roche: Is that all? If this spares my men, the favor will be well worth it.

Alternative to other CSC offerings, this capable camera made by the most evolving electronics company is a interesting offering now, when the NX300 is here. Large APS-C sensor with usable ISO 3200, easy handling, very solid build, many functions for both amateur and advanced photographers, full controls, WiFi connectivity, 8 fps, and very good lenses. The 18-55 is really nice, and firmware modifications made the auto focus faster and raw files smaller. Now when the production life of the NX210 comes to an end, some local resellers run crazy and the price is falling like a stone - I found this one for $250 with some benefits. For that money it´s a quite powerful and handy camera.

  

Capable of 12 frames per second burst mode shooting (RAW+JPEG), the snapper can also capture 14 frames per second with the mirror locked up and the camera shooting JPEGs.

  

---

Check out my preview of the EOS-1D X here:

Canon EOS-1D X exclusive hands-on

   

More photos here:

Canon EOS-1D X unveiling: photo gallery

   

Follow me on Twitter @ ShawnCNETAsia

 

and check out CNET Asia Cameras for your daily camera fix:)

Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.

 

After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .

 

The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.

Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.

 

"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."

 

Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.

 

In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).

 

Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.

 

Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.

 

"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.

 

Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.

 

Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.

 

Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.

 

The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.

 

Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.

 

"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."

 

With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.

 

From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.

 

Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.

 

On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.

 

Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.

 

Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.

 

Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.

 

The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.

 

Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.

 

Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.

 

Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.

 

A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.

 

On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.

 

The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.

 

Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.

 

But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.

Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.

 

After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .

 

The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.

Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.

 

"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."

 

Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.

 

In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).

 

Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.

 

Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.

 

"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.

 

Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.

 

Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.

 

Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.

 

The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.

 

Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.

 

"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."

 

With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.

 

From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.

 

Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.

 

On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.

 

Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.

 

Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.

 

Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.

 

The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.

 

Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.

 

Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.

 

Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.

 

A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.

 

On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.

 

The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.

 

Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.

 

But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.

Land Rover has a long history of delivering capable and premium offroad vehicles. The Range Rover has set the benchmark for premium offroad (now known as SUV) vehicle types. And, the original Land Rover (recently known as 'Defender') has set the benchmark for capable offroad attributes since its inception in 1948.

 

One thing the Defender isn't is comfortable, stylish, safe or pretty much anything you would use to describe a newly engineered car. Problem is, Land Rover has not been able to identify and produce a replacement vehicle design.

 

A few years ago Land Rover produced a series of concepts, under the title DC 100 (Defender Concept 100) looking at a modern interpretation of the core Land Rover values: offroad capability & robustness.

 

The version shown here was a followup concept, based on the three door DC 100 design.

 

The production version of this vehicle had been due in 2016/17, but at this stage there is no confirmation regarding the vehicle or the production date.

 

What we are left with are some interesting concepts glimpsing the thoughts of one of the original offroad capable product companies.

 

More info can be found at the following wikipedia link:

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_DC100

 

This Lego miniland-scale Land Rover DC 100 Concept - has been created for Flickr LUGNuts' 105th Build Challenge, titled - 'The Great Outdoors!' - a challenge for any vehicle designed for outdoor adventuring.

  

via Trends Today bit.ly/RmWgaX

 

bit.ly/Sjc2hC

 

10 greatest Aircraft in the World | The aircraft is an aircraft that is heavier than air, fixed-winged and can fly with his own power . In general the term aircraft often called by airplane or airplanes or simply a plane with the same pendefenisian purpose as a vehicle that is capable of flying in the atmosphere or air. But in aviation, the term contrasts with fixed-wing aircraft aircraft aircraft, the term is much broader sense because fleet includes aircraft and helicopters.

 

There are some of the many aircraft that have a very large size. Here are the 10 greatest Aircraft in the World that have a large size:

 

Antonov An-225

 

Largest aircraft ever created Mankind Antonov An-225 Mriya is a strategic airlift cargo aircraft, designed by air design Bureau in the Soviet Antonov. This is the heaviest plane winged in the world. The design, built to transport the Buran Orbiter. The name of the An-225 Mriya means “Dream” (Inspiration) from Ukraine. The An-225 is commercially available for flying payloads overload due to the unique size of deck cargo. Currently there is only one aircraft in operation.

 

10 greatest Aircraft in the World

 

Hughes H-4 Hercules

 

is the largest flying boat ever built, and holds the record for longest wingspan till date. Built for the second world war, the craft made of wood due to shortage of aluminum. The purpose of the flight was to transport the materials of war and the army for the United Kingdom because of the way water is threatened by U-boats to Germany. The aircraft was not completed in time for use in World War II and never advanced beyond the prototype produced. It survives in good condition at the Evergreen Aviation Museum in Oregon, USA.

 

Airbus Beluga

 

10 planes largest ever created human airbus a300-600st ( super transporters ) or beluga was the version of standard plane a300-600 businessman width termodifikasi bring parts plane and size overgrowth or cargo lumpish. At first officially called transporters super-villain, but the name of beluga become popular and now has officially adopted.

 

An-124

 

An-124 is a strategic airlift jet aircraft were introduced in 1986. These aircraft were used by Russia’s military as well as civilian airlines. This is the world’s largest aircraft ever produced and the second series of the world’s largest aircraft in operation. The aircraft is called the C-5 Galaxy Russia because of the close resemblance between the two giants. More than 40 An-124 are currently in service around the world.

 

Airbus A380

 

The Airbus A380. Slash first time, April 27, 2005, and were flown commercially first on 25 October 2007 by Singapore Airlines with routes Singapore-Australia.

 

Boeing 777-300ER

 

Boeing 777 wide-body aircraft is a twin-engine airliner manufactured by Boeing Commercial Airplanes. He can carry between 305-550 passengers and have a range of 5,600 nautical miles to 8.870 (10.400 up 16.4 thousand km). First flight of the 777 in 1994. The unique characteristics of the 777 include the six landing gear per set on each main landing gear, fuselage, and a perfectly round ‘ tailcone ‘ back that resemble blades. In 2005 his unit price of around US $ 213 million, even though the price for the airline are kept secret and can vary greatly. The Boeing 777 was made to be a replacement for the Boeing 747, but more efficient. Therefore, the Boeing 777, which is designed to replace the 747, a plane bijet (double machine) in the world. The largest Edition of the 777 is the 777-300 and the furthest distance is the 777-200LR. Emirates, the national airline of the UAE was the largest operator of 777s aircraft.

 

10 greatest Aircraft in the World

 

Airbus A340

 

Airbus A340 is commercial passenger plane supersized produced by airbus. Having the design similar to type airbus a340 but using four-engine not only two like a330. Meant to replace plane earlier generations as boeing 747 but variant past now compete with boeing 777. More than 370 a340 operated worldwide in september 2010. Production a340 officially dead upon the beak third 2011.’

 

Boeing 747

 

The plane’s four engines, manufactured by Boeing Commercial Airplanes, using a two-deck configuration where the upper deck was used for business class. 3-configuration class (first class, business class and economy class) capable of accommodating 400 passengers and configuration 1-class (economy class only) can hold up to 600 passengers. 747 can fly at high speeds (typically 0.85 Mach or 909 kilometers per hour) and capable of flying between continents (with maximum distance 13.570 miles to 15,000 miles). In 1989, Qantas flew non-stop from London to Sydney, a distance of the flight is so far 18,000 miles and finished in a time of 2 hours 9 minutes. But the flight was not carrying passengers as well as cargo aircraft (empty). In May 2004, 1382 Boeing 747, with various configurations, has been improved or enhanced, making Boeing 747 is one of the most successful products

 

Boeing 314 Clipper

 

10 largest aircraft ever created Mankind Boeing 314 Clipper flying boat was produced by long-haul Boeing aircraft Company between 1938 and 1941. One of the largest aircraft of the time, using the wings of the prototype before the Boeing XB-15 bomber to reach the range necessary for flights across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Twelve Clippers were built for Pan Am, three of which have been sold to BOAC in 1941 before delivery.

 

Boeing 377 Stratocruiser

 

10 largest aircraft ever created Mankind Boeing 377 Stratocruiser, also called, is a large aircraft built after World War II. The aircraft was developed from the C-97 Stratofreighter, a military derivative of the B-29 Superfortress was used to transport troops. First flight of the Stratocruiser was on July 8, 1947. Released in the late 1940s, the plane powered by four piston engines, driving a tractor propeller. The aircraft is able to cruise at about 32,000 feet. It also features a pressurized cabin, which is a relatively new feature for transporting the aircraft at the time, and two decks. Airlines are able to make the flight across the ocean is easier and faster with the new aircraft, which allows international travel easily to places like Hawaii.

 

The post 10 greatest Aircraft in the World appeared first on Trends Today.

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

+++ 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 origins of the Henschel Hs 165 date back to early 1937, when the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM, German Ministry of Aviation) issued a specification for a carrier-based torpedo bomber to operate from Germany's first aircraft carrier, the Graf Zeppelin construction of which had started at the end of 1936. The specification was originally issued to two aircraft producers, Fieseler and Arado, and demanded an all-metal biplane with a maximum speed of at least 300 km/h (186 mph), a range of at least 1,000 km and capable both of torpedo and dive-bombing. By the summer of 1938 the Fieseler design proved to be superior to the Arado design, the Ar 195.

Anyway, by the time the Fi 167 prototype was ready for tests and proved its excellent handling, the biplane layout was already outdated and did not promise much development potential. Therefore, the RLM's request was repeated in late 1938 and a monoplane requested. Since the Graf Zeppelin was not expected to be completed before the end of 1940, the RLM did not put much pressure behind the project.

 

Among others, Henschel replied with the Hs 165. It was a compact and conservative low wing monoplane of all-metal construction with a crew of two (pilot and navigator/observer/gunner) under a common, heavily framed and high glasshouse canopy. In order to achieve a high performance, the airframe was originally developed around the new 14 cylinder BMW 139 radial engine with 1,550 hp (1,140 kW). The main landing gear was fully retractable, retracting outwards into wells that were part of the outer, foldable wings. Similar to the Ju87 C, the wings could manually be folded backwards, so that the aircraft became very compact for onboard stowage.

The tail wheel, placed behind a V-shaped arrester hook, could not be retracted, even though a mechanism allowed the control of the tail's ground clearance for the carriage of a torpedo under the fuselage and an optimized angle of attack for starts and landings.

 

Armament consisted of a pair of 20mm MG FF cannons in the wings, a pair of 7.92mm machine guns above the engine, synchronized to fire through the propeller arc, and another single light machine gun for rear defense.

 

Among the special equipment of the Hs 165 for naval operations was a two-seat rubber dinghy with signal ammunition and emergency ammunition. A quick fuel dump mechanism and two inflatable 750 L (200 US gal) bags in each wing and a further two 500 L (130 US gal) bags in the fuselage enabled the aircraft to remain afloat for up to three days in calm seas.

 

When the first two prototypes of the Hs 165 (the V-1 and V-2) were about to be finished, it became clear that the BMW 139 would not materialize, but rather be replaced by an even more powerful engine. The new design was given the name BMW 801 after BMW was given a new block of "109-800" engine numbers by the RLM to use after their merger with Bramo. The first BMW 801A's ran in April 1939, only six months after starting work on the design, with production commencing in 1940.

 

Hs 165 V-1 was re-engined and ready for testing in mid 1940, while the first catapult launch tests on board of the Graf Zeppelin carrier were already carried out with Arado Ar 197s, modified Junkers Ju 87Bs and modified Messerschmitt Bf 109Ds. However, the Graf Zeppelin was still incomplete and not ready for full military service, and the changing strategic situation led to further work on her being suspended. In the wake of this decision, the completion of further carrier-borne aircraft was stopped and the completed examples were taken into Luftwaffe service in several evaluation/test units.

 

The Hs 165 initially fell victim to this decision, and only five airworthy airframes were completed as Hs 165 A-0 pre-production aircraft. Anyway, these were kept in service as test beds and other development duties, and Henschel kept working on detail improvements since the aircraft was also intended to become a land-based replacement for the Ju 87 dive bombers which had become obsolete by 1941, too. This aircraft was planned as the Hs 165 B.

 

However, by the spring of 1942 the usefulness of aircraft carriers in modern naval warfare had been amply demonstrated, and on 13 May 1942, the German Naval Supreme Command ordered work resumed on the German carrier projects. Henschel was happy to have the refined Hs 165 A at hand, and the type was immediately put into production.

 

The resulting Hs 165 A-1 differed in many equipment details from the former pre-production aircraft, and the armament was upgraded, too. The wing-mounted MG FF 20mm cannons were replaced with more effective and lighter MG 151/20 guns, while the pair of MG 17 machine guns above the engine was replaced by a pair of heavy MG 131 machine guns. The observer's single, light MG 15 machine gun was also upgraded to a belt-fed MG 81Z with two barrels, or a single MG 131.

The original BMW 801A engine remained the same, though, and due to the Hs 165 A-1’s higher overall weight the aircraft's performance deteriorated slightly.

 

Production did not last for long though, because further work on the Graf Zeppelin was soon terminated, and this time for good. In the meantime, the RLM had also decided to reduce the variety of aircraft types and rather develop specialized versions of existing aircraft than dedicated types like the Hs 165. As a consequence Hs 165 production was stopped again in June 1943, with several improved versions on the drawing board. These included the A-2 single seater and the C with an alternative liquid-cooled Jumo 213 powerplant.

The land-based Hs 165 B never materialized because, at the time of the type’s introduction into service, the dive bomber concept had turned out to be much too vulnerable in the European theatre of operations. Effectively, the Hs 165 needed cover from more agile fighters and did not stand a chance against enemy fighters.

 

However, until the end of production about 100 Hs 165 aircraft had been delivered to land-based front line units, since no German aircraft carrier ever materialized, and these machines were primarily used in Northern Europe in the coastal defense role and for harassment attacks in the North and Baltic Sea until 1945.

In service, they were gradually replaced by Ju 88 torpedo bombers and the Fw 190 A-5a/U14, which was able to carry a single torpedo, too, but offered a much better performance than the heavy and large Hs 165.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (pilot and observer/gunner)

Length: 11.08 m (36 ft 4 in)

Wingspan: 13.95 m (45 ft 9 in)

Height: 4.18 m (13 ft 8 in)

Wing area: 26.8 m² (288 ft²)

Empty weight: 9,725 lb (4,411 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 14,300 lb (6,486 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1 × BMW 801A air-cooled 14 cylinder two row radial engine, 1,700 hp (1,250 kW)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 302 mph (262 kn, 486 km/h) at 11,000 ft (3,350 m)

Cruise speed: 235 mph (204 kn, 378 km/h)

Range: 1,400 miles (1,220 nmi, 2,253 km)

Service ceiling: 22,500 ft (6,860 m)

Wing loading: 43.1 lb/ft² (210 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.12 hp/lb (0.19 kW/kg)

 

Armament:

2× 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon in the wings

2 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun above the engine

1 × 7.92 mm MG 81Z, firing backwards

 

1× 1000 kg (2,200 lb) bomb, or

1× 765 kg (1,685 lb) torpedo, or

1 × 500 kg (1,100 lb) bomb plus 4 × 50 kg (110 lb) bombs, or

4 × 250 kg (551 lb) ventrally

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another entry for the 2016 "In the Navy" Group Build at whatfimodelers.com, and in this case a complete kitbash for a fictional aircraft. Originally, this idea started as a Hs 126 on floats, which then turned into a low wing aircraft (in the Ju 87 class) and finally evolved into a carrier-capable torpedo bomber. Pretty dramatic evolution, but once the plan was settled, things quickly turned into hardware.

 

Ingredients include:

- Fuselage, cockpit and stabilizers (though mounted differently) from an Italeri Hs 126

- Wings from a Mastercraft (ex ZTM Plastyk) PZL 23 Karas, with the ventral gondala removed

- Landing gear from a Matchbox He 70, wheels from a Mastercraft Su-22;

- Engine/cowling from an Academy Fw 190, plus various donation parts and a putty plug

- Canopy from a Matchbox Brewster Buffalo

- German torpedo from the spares box (IIRC from an Italeri He 111)

 

Even though this is a kitbash, work was rather easy and straightforward, because most of the parts come from OOB donation kits. First, the Hs 126 fuselage was finished without an interior and the Fw 190 nose section transplanted. Inside, a styrene tube was added in order to hold the propeller and let it spin freely. In parallel, the landing gear wells were cut into the wings and the flaps separated/opened. Then the canopy was integrated into the fuselage, using styrene strips and putty.

For the wings, a wide opening had to be cut into the Hs 126’s lower fuselage, and the parts took some putty work to blend together.

Once the wings were in place, the landing gear was mounted as well as the scratched torpedo hardpoint. The cockpit interior followed suit with new seats and two figures, then the Buffalo canopy was modified for the rear machine gun mount and glued into place.

  

Painting and markings:

I wanted a rather "dry", typical German livery, and settled for a simple splinter scheme with a low waterline in the naval colors RLM 72 (a kind of very dark olive drab) and 73 (a bluish, very dark green) with light blue (RLM 65) undersides.

 

In this case I used enamels from the Modelmaster Authentic range, treated with a light black ink wash and with serious panel shading (with Humbrol 66 and a mix of Humbrol 30 + 77, respectively), because some color pictures I got hands on from early German naval aircraft (e. g. He 115 or Ar 196) suggest that the two murky, green tones weathered and bleached easily, and the enhanced contrast between the very similar colors was IMHO helpful, anyway.

 

The interior and the landing gearw as painted in contemporary RLM 02, the torpedo is simple black with a gun metal tip and a brass propeller.

 

The markings had to be puzzled together; I originally wanted the kit to be part of one of the Küstenfliegergruppen, in particular KüFliGr 106. But in mid 1943, these were partly integrated into the Kampffliegergruppen, and offensive parts of KüFliGr 106 were added to KG 6. It took some time to figure out where KG 6 was operating in the time frame I wanted to place the Hs 165, and eventually found 8./KG 6 from the third group that was based in Belgium at that time and flew Ju 88 torpedo bombers - so I added the Hs 165 to that squadron.

 

As a side effect, the aircraft would not carry any of the fuselage bands or other bright ID markings - the only color highlights are the red wing tip and the individual code "K" letter, and I used a grey decal for the 8th squadron's code letter "S" for better contrast with the dark green livery. Another "highlight" is a KG 6 emblem behind the engine, which I found on a Peddinghaus Decals sheet in the stash. Anyway, this minimal and very conservative livery does not look bad at all, though?

  

A complex kitbashing,done in about a week, and despite some trouble and major body work the result looks IMHO very good - especially the flight scenes, with the retracted (retouched...) landing gear show the sleek lines of the Hs 126, the fictional Hs 165 looks pretty fast and purposeful. And with a different engine, this could also carry some Hinomaru - the thing reminds me a lot of Japanese torpedo bombers (e. g. the B5N?) and carrier-borne reconnaissance aircraft?

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

Some background:

Following the end of the Second World War, Poland was politically dominated by the neighboring Soviet Union; as a consequence, the Polish aviation industry underwent vast changes at the behest of the Soviets. While the nation's design offices had been liquidated, some former members had joined Poland's Aviation Institute (IL) and performed some limited work on various original projects, even though such efforts were initially officially discouraged. As such, it was at IL that the effort to design would become the first jet aircraft to be developed in Poland originated; however, during the late 1950s, responsibility for the design work on the program was transferred to aircraft manufacturer PZL-Mielec at an early stage in order that IL could resume its primary mission of scientific and technological research. Much of the design work on the program was produced in response to the specified needs of a requirement issued by the Polish Air Force for a capable jet-propelled trainer aircraft, which was seeking a replacement for the piston-engine PZL TS-8 Bies at the time.

 

Polish government officials came to openly regard the project as being of considerable importance to the nation's aviation industry, thus vigorous efforts were made to support the development of the TS-11. The main designer was Polish aeronautical engineer Tadeusz Sołtyk; his initials was the source for part of the type's official designation TS-11. Early on, it was decided to adopt a foreign-sourced turbojet engine to power the aircraft. Quickly, the British Armstrong Siddeley Viper had emerged as the company's favored option; however, reportedly, negotiations for its acquisition eventually broken down; accordingly, work on the project was delayed until a suitable domestically-built powerplant had reached an advanced stage of development.

 

On 5 February 1960, the first prototype conducted its maiden flight, powered by an imported Viper 8 engine, capable of producing up to 7.80 kN (1,750 lbf) of thrust. On 11 September 1960, the aircraft's existence was publicly revealed during an aerial display held over Lodz. The next pair of prototypes, which performed their first flights during March and July 1961 respectively, were instead powered by a Polish copy of the Viper engine, designated as the WSK HO-10. The flight test program that the three prototypes were subjected to had both demonstrated the capabilities of the new aircraft and its suitability for satisfying the Polish Air Force's stated requirements for a trainer jet; as such, it was soon accepted by the Polish Air Force.

 

During 1963, the first production model of the type, designated as the TS-11 Iskra (Spark) bis A, commenced delivery to the service. From about 1966, new-build aircraft were furnished with a newer Polish-designed turbojet engine, designated as the WSK SO-1, which was capable of producing up to 9.80 kN (2,200 lbf) of thrust and reportedly gave the TS-11 a top speed of 497 mph. From 1969 onwards, the improved WSK SO-3 engine became available, offering considerably longer times between overhauls; this engine was later improved into the WSK SO-3W, which was able to generate 10.80 kN (2,425 lbf) of thrust.

 

During the 1960s, the Iskra competed to be selected as the standard jet trainer for the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union had given Poland a promise to support its aviation industry and to favor the procurement of suitable aircraft for this purpose from Polish manufacturers. However, the Iskra was not selected for this role, it had lost out to the Czechoslovak Aero L-29 “Delfín”, another newly-designed jet-propelled trainer aircraft. Largely as a result of this decision, Poland became the only Warsaw Pact member to adopt the Iskra while most others adopting the rival Delfin instead, and foreign sales to other countries were highly limited.

 

During 1975, an initial batch of 50 Iskra bis D trainer aircraft were exported to India, and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited acquired license production rights for the aircraft, which became domestically known as the HAL HJT-18 "Dawon". Beyond the basic trainer variant Dawon T.1, India also adapted projected versions of the TS-11 that had never gone into production in Poland, e. g. the Iskra BR 200, locally known as the Dawon GR.2.

 

This variant was a single-seated light attack and reconnaissance aircraft, which used the two-seater airframe but had the rear cockpit faired over. In order to expand the type's performance and ordnance, HAL improved the original design and mounted a more powerful Rolls Royce Viper turbojet with an increased airflow. Wingtip tanks were added, improving range and loiter time, and the cockpit received kevlar armor against small caliber arms for low altitude operations. Instead of the trainer version's optional single 23mm cannon in the nose section the additional space through the empty instructor's seat was used for a pair of 30mm Aden cannon in the lower fuselage flanks and its ammunition, as well as for additional navigation and communication avionics.

 

The Indian Air Force procured 64 of these light aircraft from 1978 onwards, which partly replaced the outdated HAL HF-24 "Marut" fleet. These machines even saw hot combat action in 1984, when India launched Operation Meghdoot to capture the Siachen Glacier in the contested Kashmir region.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: One

Length: 11.15 m (36 ft 7 in)

Wingspan (incl. tip tanks): 11.01 m (36 ft 1 in)

Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 5½ in)

Wing area: 17.5 m² (188 ft²)

Empty weight: 2,760 kg (6,080 lb)

Loaded weight: 4,234 kg (9,325 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 4,540 kg (10,000 lb)

Powerplant:

1 × Rolls-Royce Viper turbojet, rated at 12.2 kN (2,700 lbf)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 760 km/h (419 knots, 472 mph) at 5,000 m (16,400 ft)

Cruise speed: 600 km/h (324 knots, 373 mph)

Stall speed: 140 km/h (92 knots, 106 mph) (power off, flaps down)

Range: 1,500 km (828 nmi, 931 mi)

Service ceiling: 12,000 m (39,300 ft)

Rate of climb: 16.8 m/s (3,300 ft/min)

 

Armament:

2x 30 mm Aden cannon with 120 RPG in the lower nose

4 underwing pylons, up to 1.200 kg (2.640 lb) of bombs, unguided rocket pods or gun packs

  

The kit and its assembly:

I have already butchered several of these former Intech kits from Poland, but never built one as an Iskra. Since the kit comes with optional parts to build the planned Iskra 200 BR single-seater, I gave the kit a try - and had the idea to create an "Indian Tiger" of it, as a part of a bigger plan for a future build project (see below).

 

Building the Mistercraft TS-11 is not a pleasant experience, though. The kit comes cheap, and that's what you get. While it comes with some nice features like an engine dummy, two optional canopies and ordnance loads, the whole thing tends to be crude. There's flash, gaps, a surface finish that partly looks as if the molds had been sand-blasted, mediocre if not poor fit, and the clear parts do not deserve this description – they are utterly streaky. You can certainly make something out of it with lots of effort, but it's IMHO not a good basis for an ambitious build.

 

The biggest issue I had were the parts for the single seat cockpit. There are no locator pins, and when you manage to put the canopy onto the fuselage there remains a considerable hole in the spine where the two-seater canopy would be attached. As a result, lots of PSR was necessary around the optional parts. I also scratched a rear bulkhead for the cockpit (which normally would remain empty and “open”) and added some equipment/boxes behind the pilot's seat. Messy affair.

 

Even though I’d have loved to replace the main wheels (the OOB parts had sinkholes and poorly molded details) I stuck with them because of the complicated cover arrangement, trying to cover the worst flaws under other parts. The jet exhaust was replaced, too, since I saved the engine dummy for the spares box.

 

On the wing tips, the tips were slightly trimmed and I added tanks from an 1:144 Tornado (Dragon) - a small detail that lets the Iskra appear a bit beafier than it actually is. For the same reason I omitted the single cannon in the nose with its characteristic bump, and replaced it with two guns: leftover parts from KP MiG-19 kits, plus a pair of differently shaped, smaller fairings alongside the lower flanks.

 

The ordnance comes from the scrap box, since I wanted a little more muscle than the OOB options. I went for a pair of unguided missile launchers (from a Kangnam Yak-38) and a pair of Soviet iron bombs (KP Su-25).

  

Painting and markings:

Well, the real motivation behind this build is that I used this kit as a proof-of-concept test for a planned build of the Indian Air Force's famous MiG-21 "C 992" of No. 1 Squadron that bore a striking tiger stripe scheme – but, unfortunately, there's no conclusive color picture of the aircraft, and painting suggestions remain contradictive, if not speculative. Some profiles show the aircraft with a grey of silver fuselage underside, while some have the tiger stripes wrapped around the fuselage, or not. Some have the upper camouflage wrapped around the whole fuselage, so that only the wings’ undersides remain in a light color. Some sources also claim that no darker, basic tone had been applied at all to the upper sides, and that the stripes had been directly painted on the bare aluminum surface of the Fishbed.

The worst, color-wise thing I found for this specific aircraft were in the painting instructions of the Fujimi kit: opaque FS 34227 as basic color seems to be totally off to me... But you also find suggestions of a yellowish sand tone, mid-stone, even some greenish slate grey, whatever. Fascinating subject!

 

From what I learned about the aircraft from various sources, the scheme looks like a kind of translucent/thin layer of olive drab/greenish earth or khaki tone over bare metal on all upper surfaces and wrapped around the fuselage – very light, if there was any paint at all. Alternatively, the bare metal must have been very weathered and dull, since pictures of C992 reveal no metallic shine at all.

 

On top of that, the tiger stripes (most probably in black, but there are suggestions of dark brown or green, too…) were applied manually, apparently by at least three painters who were probably working at the same time on different sections of the Indian Fishbed. Since I have the build of this aircraft on my agenda, some day, and a plan to re-create the special paint finish, this Iskra single seater was used as a test bed.

 

External painting started with an overall coat of acrylic aluminum (Revell 99), with some panels on the wings in grey (a protective lacquer, frequently applied on real-life Iskras). Then came a coat of highly thinned FS 34087 (Olive Drab) from Modelmaster, mixed with a little of Humbrol 72 (Khaki Drill) and applied with a soft, flat brush, leaving out areas where later the decals would be placed.

 

Once dry, the camouflaged areas received a wet sanding treatment, so that the edges would become bare metal again, and, here and there, the impression of flaked/worn paint was created.

 

Next came the tiger stripes. I somewhat wanted to create the three-different-painters look of C992, and so I not only used three different brushes for this task, I also used three different shades of black (acrylic “Flat Black”, "Tar Black" and “Anthracite” from Revell). Again, once dry, light sanding created a flaked/worn look.

 

The wings' undersides were left in aluminum, as well as the fuselage. This differs from the C992 benchmark, but I found the Iskra’s low stance to be more conclusive with an all NMF underside.

 

Cockpit and landing gear interior became medium grey (FS 36231). In a wake of Soviet-ism I painted the wheel discs in bright green, as a small color contrast to the otherwise rather murky aircraft.

 

The markings are a mix of IAF roundels for an early MiG-21 from a Begemot sheet, while the tactical code was taken from the Mistercraft OOB sheet. The yellow 10 Squadron badge was created with PC software and printed on white decal sheet – another, nice color highlight.

  

It looks harmless, but building the Mistercraft Iskra was a real PITA - now I know why I formerly only butchered this kit for donor parts... However, with the little modifications I made and some different ordnance the light aircraft sells its "attack/recce" role well, and the tiger livery looks pretty unique and ...Indian. And, once more, the beauty pics reveal that this paint scheme, while looking primarily decorative, is actually quite effective over typical northern Indian landscapes. C 992 can come! :D

Waiting in the rain & in vain for 60103 Flying Scotsman at Ampthill Crossing 4/11/2017 (It was 25 minutes earlier than scheduled and sitting in my car it passed by heard but not seen)

The British Rail Class 222 is a diesel multiple unit high-speed train capable of 125 mph (200 km/h). Twenty-seven units have been built in Belgium by Bombardier Transportation.

 

The Class 222 is similar to the Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 Super Voyager trains used by CrossCountry and Virgin Trains, but it has a different interior. The Class 222 trains have more components fitted under the floors to free up space within the body. Since 2009 East Midlands Trains has been the only train operating company using Class 222s.

All coaches are equipped with a Cummins QSK19 diesel engine of 750 hp (560 kW) at 1800 rpm.[2] This powers a generator, which supplies current to motors driving two axles per coach. Approximately 1,350 miles (2,170 km) can be travelled between each refuelling.

 

Class 222 have rheostatic braking using the motors in reverse to generate electricity which is dissipated as heat through resistors situated on the roof of each coach; this saves on brake pad wear.

 

In common with the Class 220s, B5000 lightweight bogies are used - these are easily recognisable since the entire outer surface of the wheel is visible, with inboard axle bearings.

 

The Class 222 are fitted with Dellner couplers,[3] as on Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 SuperVoyager trains,[3] though these units cannot work together in service because the Class 222 electrical connections are incompatible with the Class 220 and Class 221 trains.[3][clarification needed]

 

All Class 222 units are maintained at the dedicated Etches Park depot in Derby, just south of Derby station.

 

Formation[edit]

 

Seven car length Class 222 No. 222003 at London St Pancras

 

Five car length Class 222 No. 222016 at Bedford

Class 222 units are currently running in the following formations:

 

East Midlands Trains: seven cars with 236 standard seats and 106 first-class seats.

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class

Coach C - Standard Class

Coach D - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach F - First Class

Coach G - First Class

Coach H - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

East Midlands Trains: five cars with 192 standard seats and 50 first-class seats

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class

Coach C - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite

Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

East Midlands Trains: four cars with 132 standard seats and 33 first-class seats

 

Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes

Coach B - Standard Class with Buffet counter

Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite

Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab

The four- and five-car units can be coupled to form 9/10-car services at peak times. When coupled together, coaches A-G are found in the front unit and the rear coaches become labelled J, K, L, M, N, with the first-class seats in coaches J and K.

 

Initially, the 23 units ordered for Midland Mainline were 4-car and 9-car. Over time these have been gradually modified to the current formations. The 4-car units ordered by Hull Trains had an option when constructed to be extended to 5-cars if required.[4]

East Midlands Trains has named the following Meridians:

 

Unit numberNameDate namedNamed byNotes

222 001The Entrepreneur Express22 September 2011Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed to kick off the start of the 2011 entrepreneur festival MADE

222 002The Cutlers' Company18 October 2011Pamela Liversidge, Master CutlerNamed to mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and Sheffield

222 003Tornado24 March 2009Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorDriving car 60163 named as it has the same number as Tornado

222 004Children's Hospital Sheffield26 February 2013Michael Vaughan, Charity PatonTo mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and the Sheffield Children's Hospital

222 006The Carbon Cutter31 May 2011Philip Hammond, Transport SecretaryTo mark the introduction of eco-mode to the fleet

222 008Derby Etches Park13 September 2014David Horne, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed as part of the open day at Derby Etches Park

222 015175 Years of Derby's Railways 1839 - 201418 July 2014Paul Atterbury, Antiques Roadshow Expert and railway authorTo mark 175 years of railways in Derby

222 022Invest In Nottingham19 September 2011Jon Collins, leader of Nottingham City CouncilNamed to launch the 2011 Invest in Nottingham day

222 011Sheffield City Battalion 1914-191811 November 2014Ron Wiltshire, Royal British Legion representativeNamed to honour Sheffield City Battalion who fought in the World War I

 

East Midlands Trains Class 222/0 No. 222018 at Loughborough.

In 2008 further rearrangements were made to the sets: another carriage was removed from the eight-car Meridians, except for 222 007, which has been reduced to five cars.[6] The surplus coaches were then added to the remaining four-car Meridians to make six seven-car sets (222 001-222 006) and 17 five-car sets (222 007-222 023). This took place from March to October 2008; as part of the process, two first-class coaches removed from 222 007 were converted to standard class and part first class.

 

The seven-car trains are almost exclusively used on the fast services between London St Pancras and Sheffield. These do not operate the London St Pancras-Leeds, although the service is via Sheffield. The five-car trains are mainly used between London St Pancras and Sheffield, Nottingham or Corby on semi-fast services. The four-car trains supplement the five-car trains on these services.

 

In December 2008 the Class 222 Meridians started work on the hourly London St Pancras to Sheffield services, because they have faster acceleration than the High Speed Trains and so were able to reduce the Sheffield to London journey time by 12 minutes. The hourly Nottingham service was then transferred to High Speed Train running to cover for the Meridians now working the hourly Sheffield fast service.[7]

 

In February 2009, 222 101 and 222 102 transferred from Hull Trains to East Midlands Trains, and were quickly repainted in the East Midlands Trains white livery. 222 104 followed from Hull Trains later in the year. 222 103 followed a few months after 222 104 after repairs had been completed (see below). 222 103 has now been reinstated for service after two years for repairs after the unit fell from jacks at Bombardier, Crofton in early 2007.

 

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

Former Fire Chief Thomas Harrigan, 46, lies dying in a Miami hospital room, suffering from mesothelioma, black lung, heart failure, and other diseases linked to his exposure to toxic substances while working on the Ground Zero rubble pile for three months after 9/11.Doctors have given him until July to live. On the day these photos were taken, he had receved a letter cutting off his Social Security disability payments, saying that he was capable of working

Federation Forest State Park, WA

 

“Icmadophila is capable of killing and overgrowing moss mats. When colonizing mossy surfaces, the leading edge of the lichen is associated with a zone of necrosis in the moss.” - McCune, Bruce. 2017. Microlichens of the Pacific Northwest. Volume 2: Keys to the Species.

 

"Often you'll see lichens growing with bryophytes, so the two are potential competitors and a variety of lichen-bryophyte interactions do occur. Crustose lichens look like thin skins or simple washes of paint on the underlying soil, rock or wood. At first it would appear that such simple, two-dimensional growth forms could be easily overgrown by many bryophytes. In fact some crustose lichens are very effective at keeping bryophytes away, quite likely with chemical deterrents. Lichens produce a wide variety of chemical compounds, some of which have negative effects on bryophytes - acting to prevent spore germination or inhibiting protonemal or gametophytic growth [reference link] ." - www.anbg.gov.au/lichen/ecology-plants.html

 

my lichen photos by genus - www.flickr.com/photos/29750062@N06/collections/7215762439...

 

my photos arranged by subject, e.g. mountains - www.flickr.com/photos/29750062@N06/collections

 

Tear gas canisters capable of quelling a riot in minutes were suspended from the ceiling of the Alcatraz dining hall. These canisters could be remotely activated from both the Gun Gallery and outside observation points but were never used. The dining hall and kitchen was one of the most dangerous areas of the prison. Guards were unarmed, inmates were gathered together, and eating utensils could proxy for dangerous weapons. To keep the situation under control, the officials ran the dining hall strictly and made sure meals were varied and well prepared. An armed guard kept close watch from a walkway outside the main window. At the end of each 20 minute meal, the inmates' forks, spoons and knives were laid out on the table and carefully counted.

 

The main cell house on Alcatraz Island was the largest steel-reinforced concrete building in the world when it was built in 1912. Designed to hold up to 600 prisoners, it was the brainchild and pride of Major Reuben B. Turner, construction engineer and first commandant of the military. Central steam heat, skylights and electricity contributed to its reputation as a model, modern, facility.

 

Like any other structure on the island, construction presented challenges. Material and equipment had to be shipped in on barges. Mixing cement, the main building element, required fresh water not naturally available on the land. Labor was largely provided by unskilled inmates.

 

Like prisons within a prison, four free standing cellblocks stood within the cellhouse so that no cell adjoined an outside wall or ceiling that a prisoner might tunnel through. Before it assumed its role as a maximum-security lockup, tool-proof bars replaced the flat, soft-steel barriers of the military prison and gun galleries were built at either end of the two main cell blocks.

 

Alcatraz Island, a 22-acre island located 1.5 miles offshore in San Francisco Bay, has served as a lighthouse, a military fortification, and a prison. In 1972, the island often referred to as The Rock, became a national recreation area operated by the National Park Service as part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) and is currently open to tours.

 

The island was first discovered in 1775 by Spaniard Juan Manuel de Ayala, who charted the bay and named it "La Isla de los Alcatraces," or "The Island of the Pelicans." The island's earliest recorded owner is Julian Workman was the island's earliest recorded owner, given it by Mexican governor Pio Pico in 1846 to build a lighthouse. Following the acquisition of California in 1848, the United States fortified the island for positioning of coastal batteries. When the civil War broke out in 1861, the island mounted 85 cannons (increased to 105 by 1866) and served as the San Francisco Arsenal. Alcatraz never fired its guns but was used to imprison Confederate sympathizers. In 1867, a brick jailhouse was built and in 1868, Alcatraz was designated a long-term detention facility for military prisoners--a role it prominently played during the Spanish-American War.

 

After the 1906 Earthquake, civilian prisoners were transferred to Alcatraz, and the facilities were slowly expanded at the beginning of the century. Construction on Major Reuben Turner's huge concrete main cell block was completed in 1912. The Fortress was deactivated as a military prison in 1933 and transferred to the Department of Justice, becoming a Federal Bureau of Prisons federal prison the following year. During its 29 years of operation, the penitentiary claimed no prisoners had ever successfully escaped--36 prisoners were involved in 14 attempts; 23 were caught, six were shot and killed, and three were lost at sea and never found. Alcatraz held such notable criminals as Al Capone, Robert Franklin Stroud (better known as the "Birdman of Alcatraz"), George "Machine Gun" Kelly, James "Whitey" Bulger, and Alvin "Creepy Karpis" Karpowicz (who served more time at Alcatraz than any other inmate).

 

Far more expensive to operate than other prisons, Alcatraz was closed on March 21, 1963 by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. From 1969-1971, the island was occupied by a multi-tribal group of Native Americans, culminating in the Trail of Broken Treaties.

 

National Register #76000209 (1976)

The display reads:

 

ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster

 

Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.

 

However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.

 

Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.

 

Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.

 

On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.

 

The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.

 

M42 Duster Specifications:

 

Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded

Height: 9 feet 4 inches

Length: 19 feet

Width: 10 feet 7 inches

Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners

Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds

Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun

Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine

Range: 100 miles

Speed 45 mph

 

The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.

 

The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.

 

Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.

 

Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.

 

Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.

 

SGT Mitchell Stout

C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge

 

The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:

 

Citation:

 

Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.

 

Taken December 13th, 2013.

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

Corvette (Airbus)

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

Fouga Magister (AAT)

Gazelle prototype (AAT)

Mirage III C (AAT)

Nord 1100 (AAT)

Lockheed F-104G (AAT)

MiG-15 (AAT)

MS.760 Paris (AAT)

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

Alouette II Marine (AAT)

Cessna Skymaster (AAT)

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

HM-293, de Rodolphe Grunberg

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

Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)

 

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

 

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

 

Concorde, F-BVFC, MSN209 in Air France colors

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

Corvette (Airbus)

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

Fouga Magister (AAT)

Prototype Gazelle (AAT)

Mirage III C (AAT)

North 1100 (AAT)

Lockheed F-104G (AAT)

MiG-15 (AAT)

MS.760 Paris (AAT)

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

Alouette II Marine (AAT)

Cessna Skymaster (AAT)

Fairchild Metro, former Météo-France (AAT) aircraft

HM-293, by Rodolphe Grunberg

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

Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)

India & Pakistan Owe their Freedom to Allama Mashriqi

 

By Nasim Yousaf

 

Has a powerful ruler ever transferred power without facing a significant threat to their rule? The Indian sub-continent’s freedom was inconceivable without Allama Mashriqi’s private army of over five million uniformed Khaksars who threatened British rule. Considering this reality, India and Pakistan owe their independence to Allama Inayatullah Khan Al-Mashriqi – a legend and a great freedom fighter.

 

Allama Mashriqi’s struggle to revive the glory of the Indian nation started with his poetic work, Kharita, which he wrote in his youth (1902-1909). In 1912, Mashriqi discussed his future aims to liberate the nation when he spoke at a graduation dinner (hosted by the Indian Society of Cambridge University in his honor):

 

“[translation]…Our educational achievements bear testimony to the fact that India can produce unparalleled brains that can defeat the British minds. India is capable of producing superior brains that can make the nation’s future brighter. After we return from here, we must ponder how to break the chains of slavery from the British…We should keep our vision high and enlarge our aims and goals so we can be free from the chains of slavery as soon as possible” (Al-Mashriqi by Dr. Mohammad Azmatullah Bhatti).

 

Later, Mashriqi’s work Tazkirah (published in 1925) spoke of jihad as well as the rise and fall of nations and was a step towards bringing revolt against British rule. In 1926, Mashriqi embarked on a trip to Egypt and Europe; there, he delivered a lecture on his book Tazkirah, jihad and fighting colonial rule. In Germany, Mashriqi was received by Helene von Nostitz-Wallwitz, the niece of German President Hindenburg (Al-Islah, May 31, 1935). While in Germany, Mashriqi discussed the aforementioned topics with Albert Einstein, Helene, and other prominent individuals; these conversations reflected his mindset of bringing an uprising in foreign lands (as well as in India) against the oppression of British colonial rule. Earlier, while in Egypt at the International Caliphate Conference, Mashriqi succeeded in defeating a British plan to have a Caliph of their choice elected to control the Muslim world. During the trip, Mashriqi acted courageously and ignored the risks of being persecuted or even hanged for treachery against the British Empire in foreign lands…and that too as a government employee.

 

Meanwhile in India, M.A. Jinnah, M.K. Gandhi, the All-India Muslim League, and Indian National Congress had not taken any concrete steps to bring revolt or overturn British rule. Anyone who attempted to rise against British rule was either ruthlessly crushed or faced the end of his/her political career. As such, Muslim and Hindu leadership adopted ineffective methods such as passing resolutions, taking out rallies and raising anti-British slogans. Mashriqi felt that such methods were useless and would not end the British Raj.

 

In 1930, Mashriqi resigned from his lucrative job to bring independence to the nation. Risking the lives of himself and his family, Mashriqi launched a private army called the Khaksar Movement. Enrollment in the combative and revolutionary Movement was tough; the masses were not only dispirited, but scared to risk their lives for freedom. In order to promote his mission, Mashriqi traveled in buses, tongas, or third-class compartments of trains and walked for miles at a time in poverty-stricken and rural areas. He was indistinguishable from the common people. This was a man who could have easily accepted an Ambassadorship and title of “Sir” (both of which he was offered by the British in 1920) and continued to draw a hefty salary, brushing shoulders with the British rulers and leading a life of utmost luxury. However, he chose to fight for the people instead.

 

In 1934, Mashriqi launched the Al-Islah weekly newspaper. The Times of India (August 08, 1938) wrote, “The publication of Al-Islah gave a fresh impetus to the [Khaksar] movement which spread to other regions such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran [as well as Bahrain, Burma, Ceylon, Egypt, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Yemen, and U.K].” By the late 1930s, from Peshawar to Rangoon, the private army of Khaksars had grown to millions.

 

Throughout these years, the Khaksars continued their activities, including military camps where mock wars were held using belchas (spades), swords, batons, and sometime even cannons. Many Khaksars had willingly signed pledges in blood indicating that they would lay their lives and property if necessary for the cause of freedom. The Khaksars paraded in the streets of India and spread their message against British rule, including running slides in cinemas, chalking walls, distributing pamphlets and flyers and through Al-Islah. By 1939, Mashriqi had prepared a plan to oust British rule. Later that year, he paralyzed the Government of U.P. Thereafter, Mashriqi formed a parallel government, published a plan (in Al-Islah newspaper) to divide India into 14 provinces, issued currency notes, and ordered the enrollment of an additional 2.5 million Muslim and non-Muslim Khaksars.

 

By now, the strength of the Khaksars had been revealed and the British foresaw Mashriqi taking over. Under intense pressure, the rulers began to make promises of freedom for India and started conversations with M.A. Jinnah, M.K. Gandhi, and others. The Government also took immediate action by launching an anti-Mashriqi campaign in the media; Khaksar activities and the Al-Islah journal were banned. A large number of Khaksars were mercilessly killed by police on March 19, 1940. Mashriqi, his sons, and thousands of Khaksars were arrested. Mashriqi’s young daughters received death threats and threats of abduction. Intelligence agencies were alerted. While in jail, life was made miserable for Mashriqi and the Khaksars; many individuals were kept in solitary confinement and several got life imprisonment. While their activities were banned, the Khaksar Tehrik continued operating from the underground; Al-Islah’s publishing operations were moved to other cities (Aligarh and Calcutta). To overcome censoring of mail and phone calls, they employed the use of secret codes. The Government repression brought additional uprise in the country against British rule.

 

While in jail, Mashriqi was informed that in order to obtain his release, he must announce the disbandment of the Movement; he refused and instead kept a fast unto death that made the rulers fearful of additional backlash from the public and forced them to release Mashriqi after two years in jail without a trial (strict restrictions on his movements remained after release). Thus, Mashriqi, his family, and the Khaksars refused to surrender and the rulers failed to suppress the Khaksar Tehrik.

 

Upon his release (despite restrictions on his movements), Mashriqi asked Jinnah, Gandhi, and other leaders to form a joint front and stand with him so he could end British rule. He also pushed for a Jinnah-Gandhi meeting and continued to promote Hindu-Muslim unity. However, vested interests prevented these leaders from joining hands with Mashriqi.

 

As the British continued holding talks with their favored leaders, Mashriqi continuing pushing rigorously for a revolt. In 1946, Mashriqi succeeded in bringing about a Bombay Naval Mutiny on February 18, 1946 (Al-Islah, March 08, 1946), which also prompted mutiny within the other armed forces.

 

On June 08, 1946, at the Khaksar Headquarters in Icchra (Lahore), Mashriqi addressed a gathering of Khaksars, soldiers released from the armed forces after World War II, and the soldiers of the defeated Indian National Army (INA) of Subhas Chandra Bose: “after sixteen years of unprecedented self-sacrifices, we are now ardent to reach our objective as fast as possible, and within the next few months will do anything and everything to achieve our goal” (Al-Islah June 14, 1946).

 

Final preparations for a revolt for independence took place in November 1946 at a historic Khaksar Camp in Peshawar (from November 07-10, 1946), where mock wars and military exercises were held. Mashriqi addressed a crowd of 110,000 Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others; he shed light on the self-seeking and futile politics of Indian leaders and gave an account of the British exploitations of India’s resources. The speech sparked a sense that further abuse by the rulers would no longer be tolerated and their rule must come to an end. Thereafter, on December 01, 1946, Mashriqi distributed a pamphlet in India proclaiming:

 

“[translation] Idara-i-Aliya [Khaksar Headquarters] shall soon issue an order that in the entire India, four million [sources quote a range from 4-5 million members] Khaksars, side by side with hundreds of thousands rather millions of supporters shall march simultaneously…This moment shall dawn upon us very soon and that is why it is being ordered that a grand preparation for this historical day should commence immediately…so that British can clearly witness the day of India’s freedom…”

 

With this bold announcement, a British hold on power was no longer possible. As such, Prime Minister Clement Attlee announced a transfer of power by no later than June 1948. Mashriqi suspected that the announcement could be a ploy to divert public attention or to buy time to create dissent within the country (for example, by encouraging ongoing Muslim-Hindu riots), so that the British could justify and extend their rule.

 

To close the door on any such ploys, Mashriqi ordered 300,000 Khaksars to assemble on June 30th, 1947 in Delhi; this order put the final nail in the coffin for the British Raj. Such a huge assembly of this private army of Khaksars would enable them to take over all important installations – including radio/broadcasting stations, newspaper offices, British officials’ lodges, and government offices. Immediately following these steps, an overturn of British rule was to be announced via media. The timing of this coup d’état was fitting, as the entire nation (including the armed forces, who had already revolted against the regime) wanted an end to British rule. With this impending massive assembly of Khaksars in Delhi, the rulers saw the writing on the wall; they feared their humiliation and defeat at the hands of the Khaksars and angry masses. Moreover, the rulers could not accept a united India…and that too at the hands of Allama Mashriqi.

 

Therefore, without any other compelling reason, a transfer of power was undertaken by the British in an extraordinary rush; on June 3rd, 1947, the Viceroy of India, Lord Mountbatten, announced a plan to partition India. Mountbatten called a hurried meeting of their selected Muslim and Hindu leaders and asked them to accept the plan immediately. The selected leaders saw power falling in the hands of Mashriqi and he becoming the champion of freedom if they did not accept the plan. Jealousy and vested interests came into play. M. K. Gandhi, Jinnah’s All-India Muslim League, and the Indian National Congress accepted the plan almost immediately. Mashriqi tried to prevent the All-India Muslim League from signing off on the plan, but was “stabbed” (The Canberra Times, Australia, June 11, 1947) on the same day that the League accepted the plan (June 09, 1947). It was obvious that the motive of this stabbing was to keep Mashriqi from stopping the partition of India (in order to have a united independence).

 

The partition plan was accepted and announced all over the world only about two weeks before the assembly of the Khaksars was to take place. Logically speaking, can it actually be called a “transfer of power”? The British handed over control of the nation in a rush because the Khaksars were on the verge of forcibly ending their rule; indeed, over 100,000 (Dawn July 02, 1947 reported “70,000 to 80,000”) Khaksars had already entered Delhi despite strict measures in place.

 

The establishments in India and Pakistan and historians overstate the role of the British’s preferred leaders, while failing to recognize the reality of what led to independence. Neither Jinnah nor Gandhi had the street power to overturn-British rule; it is for this reason that they were seeking a transfer of power, which they obtained based on the threat posed to British rule by the powerful Khaksar Movement. Historians have thus far presented history from a colonial or Pakistani/Indian state point of view, rather than based on the facts on the ground.

 

Instead of giving credit to Mashriqi, some historians provide flimsy reasons for the end of British rule. Some of the reasons they cite are:

 

(1) Gandhi’s methods and Jinnah’s constitutional fight brought freedom to India and Pakistan respectively -- this argument is neither supported by human history nor the realities on the ground, as colonial rulers do not voluntarily relinquish their power without a significant threat to their rule.

 

(2) The British fast-forwarded transfer of power and left quickly to avoid blame for the massive killings that would ensue -- this argument also does not make sense as the massive communal riots/killings began on Direct Action Day (August 16, 1946), so an early transfer of power would not have helped the rulers avoid blame. Even if we were to accept these writers’ claims, why would Lord Mountbatten then become the first Governor General of India and why would many Britishers continue to hold important positions in Pakistan and India?

 

(3) The British left India because after World War II, they became economically weak and could not keep their hold on India -- this claim does not hold water. India’s rich resources would have helped them to recover their losses from the war.

 

(4) The end of the British Raj came about because of Subhas Chandra Bose’s Indian National Army (INA) -- the INA was defeated in 1945 and thereafter, Subhas Chandra Bose was not on the scene anymore (he was either killed or went into hiding as claimed).

 

The Pakistani, Indian, and United Kingdom establishments do not let the truth come out. Despite my open letters to the Chief Justices of the Supreme Courts and the Prime Ministers of Pakistan and India, both countries (and the U.K.) have not declassified Mashriqi and the Khaksar Tehrik’s confiscated papers from the pre-post partition era. In order to hide the truth, Mashriqi’s role is also excluded from the educational curriculum and academic discussions everywhere. The Partition Museum in Amritsar, Lahore Museum, London Museum and others do not display Mashriqi and the Khaksar Tehrik’s artifacts.

 

Despite the current state of affairs, the ground realities speak loudly to Mashriqi’s heroic fight; without Mashriqi’s private army of Khaksars, the British rulers would not have even come to the table to discuss the freedom of the Indian sub-continent (now Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan), leave alone quit the lucrative sub-continent. As such, both countries owe their independence to Mashriqi and he is a founding father of India and Pakistan.

 

Nasim Yousaf is a biographer and grandson of Allama Mashriqi. Yousaf’s works have been published in peer-reviewed encyclopedias and academic journals (including at Harvard University and by Springer of Europe), and he has presented papers at academic conferences, including at Cornell University.

 

Copyright © 2020 Nasim Yousaf

 

Published:

 

Kashmir Images (Srinagar, Kashmir), August 22, 2020

Pakistan Link (USA), August 28, 2020

The Miracle (Canada), August 28, 2020

Brisbane Indian Times (Australia), September 12, 2020

Asian World News (United Kingdom), August 20, 2020

Isma Times (India), Aug 20, 2020

Muslim Mirror (India), August 25, 2020

New Age Islam (India), August 21, 2020

Fast Kashmir, (Kashmir), Aug 20, 2020

 

***

 

2) archive.org/details/india-pakistan-owe-their-freedom-to-a...

 

2) issuu.com/nasimyousaf

 

#AllamaMashriqi #AllamaMashriqiVirtualMuseum #KhaksarMovement #Khaksars #TwoNationTheory #Partition #PartitionofIndia #OralHistory #BritishEmpire #PakistanHistory #IndianHistory #FreedomMovement #LahoreMuseum #PartitionMuseum #AmritsarMuseum #PartitionMuseumAmritsar #Lahore #Twitter #YouTube #SocialMedia #CollectionsUnited

To quote that international superstar singer and her very capable vocals ;-p "Oops I Did It Again"! Although i've failed in recent weeks to buy much of anything genuinely new and interesting off the pegs of our retailers I did manage to find yet more of these new 2017 recoloured VW Transporter T3 Crew Cabs in various ASDA stores. Admittedly i've only found them on my quest to find Batch H as I already have plenty but the novelty of these extraordinary good diecasts hasn't subsided enough yet for me to leave them behind! How could I when they look this polished and professional, its a normal commercial vehicle from the 80's and 90's for heavens sake but I can't believe how good it has turned out especially compared to the original debut version. Its Matchbox at their very finest and all it took was to give it a plain colour, some very much needed front tampo treatment and those delicious chrome disc wheels and voila... diecast perfection! Mint and boxed.

Forget the bad quality of colors and the heavy noise(I'm waiting for the IR filter): this is a sample of what resolution this system it' capable:

The large format lens projects an image on the scanner that is just like an A4 sheet. The sensor can cover the entire width, but cannot cover more than 6cm in height, so it's a "strip" from the entire image.

In a scanner normally the lens and the mirrors in front of the ccd makes possible to cover the entire height of the paper, but with this system the sensor scan just his real height, so the resulting image is "anamorphic". I have to resize it via software.

The hardware vertical resolution is 600dpi, but it's 1200 horizontal: If I scan at 600 dpi the resulting photo is 5100x5100 pixels, but if I choose 1200dpi only the horizontal resolution is real, the vertical is a 600dpi interpolated. the ratio of the anamorphic format is 5:1, so if I scan at 600 dpi i have to multiply the width x5, but if I scan at 1200dpi i can multiply only X 2.5, halfening the height.

So, 600x1200 dpi it's the maximum resolution, and the resulting horizontal density of the pixels is 2.5 times lower than vertical. (53 MP real, 133MP interpolated)

It's also possible to make multiple scans, covering the entire area: the resulting image can be over 500 MP)

[IT]

Tralasciamo i colori strani e il forte rumore dellimmagine(sto aspettando che mi arrivi il filtro per bloccare gli infrarossi): questo è solo un esempio di quale risoluzione è capace questo sistema: La lente di grande formato proietta un immagine grande circa come un foglio A4.

Il sensore riesce a coprire l'intera larghezza ma non può coprire più di 6 cm in altezza, quindi questa è una "striscia" dell'intera immagine.

In uno scanner normalmente la lente e gli specchi davanti al sensore fanno in modo di coprire l'intera altezza del foglio ma con questo sistema il sensore può scannerizzare solo la sua reale altezza, quindi l'immagine risultante è "anamorfica". Devo poi ridimensionarla via software.

La massima risoluzione verticale è 600dpi, ma arriva a 1200 orizzontali. Se scannerizzo a 600dpi la foto risultante è di 5100x5100 pixel, ma se scannerizzo a 1200dpi solo la risoluzione orizzontale è reale, mentre a verticale è sempre 600dpi, ma interpolata. Il rapporto di riduzione anamorfico è di 5:1 quindi in uno scan a 600dpi devo allargare l'immagine X5, ma se invece lavoro a 1200dpi posso permettermi di moltiplicare solo x2,5, dimezzando l'altezza.

Quindi 600x1200dpi è la massima risoluzione effettiva, e la densità dei pixel in larghezza è 2,5 volte inferiore che in altezza (53megapixel reali, 133 interpolati).

è possibile fare anche degli scan multipli per coprire l'intera area di proiezione, e l'immagine risultante può superare i 500megapixel.

Not long after the F-4C Phantom II entered USAF service in the early 1960s, the service issued a requirement for a heavy, all-missile equipped interceptor with variable-sweep wings and a top speed of nearly Mach 3. This requirement was soon cancelled, however, due to two events: the Vietnam War and the flight of the Soviet MiG-25 Foxbat. Over North Vietnam, the heavy, all-missile F-4 had found itself at a disadvantage against smaller, lighter, gun-equipped MiG-17s, while the new Foxbat was erroneously thought to be a generation ahead of anything then in American service, both agile and capable of Mach 3 performance.

 

The USAF changed its requirement to a lighter aircraft that would include an internal gun, with an emphasis on performance; it rejected a Grumman proposal for a land-based version of the F-14 Tomcat as being too heavy. The new F-X proposal did away with maintenance-intensive swing wings in favor of a more conventional, easier to repair and produce fighter with a high thrust-to-weight ratio and superb performance in the vertical, once more drawing on the Vietnam experience, where North Vietnamese fighters had performed poorly in vertical maneuvers. Almost as much emphasis was given to the F-X’s radar, which had to have look-down, shoot-down capability—another failure of American technology over Vietnam. McDonnell Douglas’ twin-tailed proposal won the F-X competition, despite being roughly the same weight as a F-4E Phantom II, and more expensive; demands for lighter and less expensive fighters as an alternative to this new YF-15 Eagle led to the development of the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F/A-18 Hornet.

 

The first F-15 flew in July 1972 and immediately exhibited superb flight characteristics: for its size, which was slightly larger than a F-4, it was very agile. The combination of powerful turbofan engines and thrust-to-weight ratio made the F-15 one of the first fighters to be able to accelerate in a climb, rather than lose speed. Like the F-4, it used a mix of conformal-fuselage mounted AIM-7 Sparrows and wing rail-mounted AIM-9 Sidewinders, but unlike the F-4, the F-15 was built from the start with an internal 20mm gatling cannon. From a fighter pilot’s standpoint, the best part of the F-15, aside from its phenomenal performance, was the bubbletop canopy, set forward from the wide fuselage, giving superb all-around visibility.

 

The cost of the F-15 was brought into question, especially after the defection of a MiG-25 pilot in 1975 revealed that the Foxbat was nowhere near as capable as originally thought, but this only led the USAF to go with a mix of the F-15 and the less expensive F-16, which would prove to be superb “stablemates” in the decades to come. F-15As entered USAF service in 1976. Almost immediately, the F-15A was supplemented and supplanted by the F-15C, which introduced improved avionics, engines, and radar; F-15As underwent the Multi-Stage Improvement Program (MSIP) beginning in 1983, which rendered them basically identical to F-15Cs, and the two types are indistinguishable externally. The F-15 was also developed into the F-15E Strike Eagle attack aircraft, described separately.

 

Though the F-15 was costly, the F-14 Tomcat was even more expensive, and so Israel chose the Eagle as the replacement for the Mirage III in 1978. Not long after the first Israel F-15As became operational, the Eagle scored its first kills over Syrian MiG-21s in 1979. This was to begin the F-15’s excellent combat record: during the 1982 Lebanon War, Israeli F-15s added 40 more kills over MiG-21s, MiG-23 Floggers, and MiG-25s; Saudi Arabia, which had received F-15s in 1981, added two Iranian F-4Es in 1984.

 

The F-15’s shining moment was during the First Gulf War with Iraq in 1991. Eagles had been among the first aircraft deployed to the Gulf region in what was, at the time, the longest deployment ever undertaken by fighters—a grueling 14-hour flight from Langely AFB, Virginia, to Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, soon after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August 1990. The Eagle fleet, which included Saudi F-15Cs, was added to during Operation Desert Shield; when Desert Storm was unleashed in January 1991, F-15s were in the vanguard, their target the Iraqi Air Force. Over the next six weeks, F-15s achieved air supremacy over Iraq, scoring 34 kills over mostly MiG-23s and MiG-29s, while the Saudis added two Mirage F.1s to the total. Four Yugoslavian MiG-29s fell to F-15 missiles in 1999, bringing the F-15’s tally to 105 kills to date during its career: in return, no F-15s have been lost in aerial combat.

 

The F-15 Eagle remains the backbone of the USAF’s fighter community, despite suffering from a shortage of parts in the late 1990s and increasing age. F-15s have been updated to carry the AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9X, while Israeli F-15s carry a mix of the AMRAAM and the deadly Python IV helmet-guided missile. The F-22 Raptor was meant to wholly replace the F-15, but the cancellation of further F-22 production in 2010 has, as of this writing, left a gap between F-22s in service and F-15s needing to be replaced. As a result, the F-15C may remain in service as late as 2025, with about 70 being updated as “Legacy Eagles”—these aircraft are receiving the same AESA advanced radar as the F-22. Boeing (which absorbed McDonnell Douglas) has also offered an advanced variant of the F-15, the so-called “Silent Eagle” that incorporates features of the F-22 into the F-15E airframe, which is still in production. F-15s also continue to serve with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Japan. Though getting aged by fighter standards, F-15s will be around for a long time to come.

 

Finding a F-15 in an out of the way location like Zion, Illinois was a bit of a surprise, but the Russell Military Museum has 75-0084, a F-15B, on display. One of the first F-15Bs delivered to the USAF, 75-0084 seems to have spent most of its career as a trainer and testbed, serving with the 325th Fighter Weapons Wing at Tyndall AFB, Florida and then the 46th Test Wing at nearby Eglin AFB. In addition to its duties as a trainer, 75-0084 also occasionally undertook Operation Coronet Eagle sorties in the Gulf of Mexico, assisting Coast Guard and Drug Enforcement Agency forces in intercepting suspected drug runners. As a high-time Eagle, it was retired around 2010.

 

After that, its history becomes somewhat murky. According to the Russell Military Museum, it was acquired for their museum after being used as a ground maintenance trainer (GF-15B) at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, but other sources hold that it was donated either to the Chanute AFB Museum at Rantoul, Illinois or the Evergreen Aviation Museum in McMinnville, Oregon--or both. Given that much of the Chanute museum's collection was acquired by other Midwest museums after it closed in 2016, it may be a former Chanute aircraft.

 

Either way, 74-0084 has seen some better days. It is missing both rudders and its engines, and several inspection panels are open (reinforcing the theory that it was used as a ground trainer) The canopy and cockpit are intact, however, and visitors can use the airstairs to look inside. It is painted in faded Mod Eagle camouflage, with equally faded 46th TW patches and tail stripes.

ADULT SEA OTTERS: MONTEREY BAY

 

The southern, or California, sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) has been listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act since 1977. It belongs to the order Carnivora and the family Mustelidae. Two other otter subspecies are also recognized – E. lutris kenyoni, which is found from Oregon to Alaska, and E. lutris lutris, which inhabits parts of Russia and northern Japan. Sea otters are highly specialized marine mammals capable of living their entire lives without ever having to leave the ocean, have the densest fur of any mammal and are one of the few marine species to use tools. Sea otters are an apex predator of the near shore ecosystem. The species is considered a keystone species because of their critical importance to the health and stability of the near shore marine ecosystem. They are also considered a sentinel species because their health reflects that of California’s coastal oceans. The southern sea otter population has exhibited high levels of mortality in recent years. Scientists attribute up to 40 percent of southern sea otter mortality to infectious diseases alone, many of which are known to have anthropogenic causes and land-sea linkages. The single greatest threat to the sea otter is an oil spill. One large oil spill in central California could be catastrophic, with the potential of driving the entire southern sea otter population into extinction.

 

Description

The sea otter is one of the smallest marine mammals, but one of the largest members of the family Mustelidae, a group that includes skunks and weasels among others. Adult males reach an average length of 4.5 feet (1.4 m) with a typical weight between 50 and 100 lbs. (23 to 45 kg), while adult females reach an average length of 4 feet (1.2 m) and typically weigh 45 lbs. (20 kg). It has a highly buoyant, elongated body, blunt snout and small, wide head. Sea otters have an acute sense of smell and taste and have good vision both above and below the water surface. They also rely heavily on their sense of touch.

 

Sea otters exhibit numerous adaptations, which help them survive in their challenging marine environment. Long whiskers help them to detect vibrations in murky waters and sensitive forepaws, with retractable claws, help them to groom, locate and capture prey underwater, and use tools. When underwater, they can close their nostrils and small ears. The sea otter’s hind feet are webbed and flipper-like, and are used in conjunction with its lower body to propel the animal through the water. It has a long, flattened tail, which they use as a rudder and for added propulsion. Hearing is one sense that is not yet fully understood, although studies suggest they are particularly sensitive to high-frequency sounds. Their teeth are unique for a mammal in that they are blunt and designed for crushing, rather than being sharp for tearing like most marine mammals are equipped with.

With the exception of its nose and pads of its paws, the sea otter’s body is covered in dense fur. The fur consists of two layers. The short, brown under fur can be as dense as 1 million hairs per square inch, making its fur the densest of any mammal. By comparison, we only have about 100,000 hairs in total on our heads. A top layer of long, waterproof guard hairs helps to keep the under fur layer dry by keeping cold water away from the skin. The pelage is typically deep brown in color with silver-gray highlights, with the coloration of the head and neck being lighter than the body. Unlike other marine mammals, such as seals and sea lions, sea otters do not have any blubber, so they depend on this exceptionally thick, water-resistant fur to stay warm in the cold, coastal Pacific.

 

Range & Habitat

Historically, southern sea otters were present in coastal marine habitats from northern California to Baja California in Mexico. This range decreased significantly during the fur trade during the 18th and 19th centuries, with excessive hunting nearly driving the species into extinction by the early 1900s. The current range extends along the California coast from Half Moon Bay in the north to Santa Barbara in the south, though individuals are occasionally seen outside these limits. A small population of sea otters lives at San Nicolas Island as a result of translocation efforts initiated in 1987.

 

Sea otters are found in a variety of coastal marine habitats, including rocky shores and sea-bottoms, sandy sea-bottoms, as well as coastal wetlands. Sea otters naturally inhabit offshore areas with an abundance of food and kelp canopy. They tend to live in ocean depths shallower than 130 feet (40 m) with water temperatures ranging between 35°F and 60°F.

 

Behavior

Most of a sea otter’s life is spent at sea, though they do occasionally haul out on land, where they appear clumsy and walk with a rather awkward gait. They eat, sleep, mate and give birth in the water. Sea otters spend most of their time floating on their backs at the surface grooming, eating, resting, and diving for food on the seafloor. Sea otters are relatively slow swimmers, generally traveling at 3-5 mph (5-8 km/h). They typically swim belly-up on their backs, propelling themselves through the water using their webbed hind feet. If a faster speed is required, for instance when a male is patrolling it’s territory for competing males or when in hot pursuit of a sexually receptive female, it turns over onto its stomach and in addition to using its webbed hind feet, it undulates its entire body for greater propulsion and acceleration.

 

Sea otters groom themselves almost continuously while at the surface, a practice critical for maintaining the insulating and water repellant properties of their fur. Its pliable skeleton and loosely fitted skin allow the animal the flexibility to reach any part of its body. During a grooming bout, which generally occurs directly after a foraging bout (a period of time in which diving and eating takes place) or resting bout, the animal can be seen somersaulting, twisting and turning, and meticulously rubbing its fur at the water surface. This behavior not only cleans the fur, but also traps air bubbles against the skin within the millions of hairs of its pelage. This layer of entrapped air creates an insulating barrier (similar to that of a double-paned window), which prevents water from reaching the skin. Constant grooming is absolutely critical for their survival. If cold ocean water reaches their skin, it will immediately begin to draw heat out of the animal, which disrupts the animal’s ability to thermo regulate and will ultimately lead to hypothermia and death.

Sea otters often rest together in single-sex groups called rafts. They are known to wrap themselves up in kelp to keep from drifting out to sea. While resting at the surface, a sea otter will often times hold its forepaws above the water surface and fold its hind feet up onto to its torso to help conserve heat.

 

With the exception of territorial males, who have the privilege of living among females, males and females tend to live in separate groups. The center of the sea otter range is predominately occupied by females (of all ages) and territorial males, as well as some dependent pups and recently weaned juvenile males. The northern and southern edges of the range are largely male dominated areas; consisting of juvenile, sub adult and adult males. Numbers in these male areas tend to increase in winter and spring because there are fewer mating opportunities with sexually receptive females during this time of the year.

 

Females generally have small home territories while many adult males hold larger aquatic territories consisting of several adult females. Bachelor males (animals who are either to young or too old to defend their own territories) reside in the large male-only groups at either end of the range. Males travel much greater distances throughout the range than females, typically making seasonal treks of up to 200 miles between the months of June and November when the highest proportion of females are in estrous. On any given day though, males tend to remain in the same general location, moving only a mile or two along the coastline. Females, on the other hand, are sedentary by nature, generally staying within 10 – 20 miles of their home ranges. Their home ranges are smaller because they have higher metabolic costs while pregnant and raising their pup.

 

Sea otters are equally active both night and day. A foraging bout occurs for several hours in the morning, typically starting just before sunrise. A second foraging bout begins in the afternoon, usually lasting for several hours until sunset. A grooming bout occurs before and after each foraging bout and resting bout follows at midday, followed again by another grooming and resting bout. A third foraging bout may also occur around midnight.

 

Although difficult to hear from shore, sea otters exhibit a variety of vocal behaviors. Pups are the most vocal. A pup can be heard squealing when its mother leaves it to dive for food and often times when a male approaches. Their cry is similar to that of a gull. Other vocalizations include: coos and grunts, which occur when an animal is eating or when content, as in the case of a pair-bonded couple during courtship; whines occur when an animal is frustrated, as in the case of an older pup wanting to suckle or an adult male attempting to mate with an uninterested female; growls, snarls, whistles and hisses can be heard when an animal is frightened or distressed, as in the case of a captured otter.

  

Food & Foraging

An otter must consume approximately 25% of its bodyweight in prey each day just to stay alive! A 75-pound otter can eat up to 1,500 sea urchins a day, or about 25 pounds of seafood (for a 75 pound kid, that would amount to eating 75 quarter pound hamburgers every day!). To meet its high energetic and thermoregulation demands, a sea otter’s metabolic rate is 2 to 3 times that of comparatively sized mammals. Sea otters consume a wide variety of benthic invertebrates. Prey items include sea urchins, abalone, crabs, mussels, clams, marine snails, marine worms, sea stars, and squid. In total, otters eat at least 50 species of benthic (bottom-dwelling) invertebrates, although individuals tend to specialize on only a few main prey types. Prey specialization and feeding preferences are passed on from mother to pup.

 

The strong forelegs paws are used to locate and capture prey. Pockets of loose skin under each foreleg are used to store prey it has gathered on the seafloor for the ascent to the surface. Rocks are often used as tools to dislodge prey on the sea floor and to break open the hard outer shells of some prey items upon returning to the surface. Floating belly-up in the water, they place rocks on their chests and repeatedly pound hard-shelled prey against them to gain access the meat inside. While eating, an otter will roll repeatedly in the water to wash away food scraps from its chest. Unlike most other marine mammals, sea otters commonly drink seawater. Although most of the animal’s water needs are met through the consumption of prey, its large kidneys allow it to extract fresh water from seawater.

 

Sea otters generally forage close to shore in depths shallower than 60 feet (18 m) but are capable of diving to depths of 300 feet (90 m) or more. With a relatively large lung capacity for it’s size, an otter can hold its breath for 5 minutes, but most dives are two minutes or less in duration. Source: www.seaotters.com

 

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

The Shot:

  

Taken in a Studio Setup at the National College of Arts in Lahore, 3 continues lights and 2 strobes used to light up the scene.

  

EXIF

  

Canon EOS 6D

Exposure: 1/400

Aperture: f/2.8

Focal Length: 120mm

ISO Speed: 400 ISO

Exposure Bias: 0 Step

Metering Mode: Pattern

Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II USM ♥

  

Facebook | Twitter

For Professional Services, Please contact:

(+92) 345 588 8440

muhammadfahadraza@gmail.com

Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.

 

After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .

 

The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.

Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.

 

"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."

 

Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.

 

In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).

 

Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.

 

Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.

 

"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.

 

Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.

 

Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.

 

Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.

 

The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.

 

Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.

 

"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."

 

With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.

 

From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.

 

Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.

 

On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.

 

Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.

 

Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.

 

Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.

 

The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.

 

Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.

 

Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.

 

Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.

 

A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.

 

On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.

 

The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.

 

Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.

 

But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.

Yellow is a color capable of charming God.

----Vincent van Gogh

The Convair B-58 Hustler was the first operational supersonic jet bomber, and the first capable of Mach 2 flight. The aircraft was developed for the United States Air Force for service in the Strategic Air Command (SAC) during the 1960s. Originally intended to fly at high altitudes and speeds to avoid Soviet fighters, the introduction of highly accurate Soviet surface-to-air missiles forced the B-58 into a low-level penetration role that severely limited its range and strategic value. This led to a brief operational career between 1960 and 1969. Its specialized role was succeeded by other American supersonic bombers, such as the FB-111A and the later B-1B Lancer.

 

The B-58 received a great deal of notoriety due to its sonic boom, which was often heard by the public as it passed overhead in supersonic flight.

 

This aircraft flew from Los Angeles to New York and back on 5 March 1962, setting three separate speed records, and earning the crew the Bendix Trophy and the Mackay Trophy for 1962. The aircraft was flown to the Museum on 1 March 1969.

 

General characteristics

 

* Crew: 3: pilot; observer (navigator, radar operator, bombardier); defense system operator (DSO; electronic countermeasures operator and pilot assistant).

* Length: 96 ft 10 in (29.5 m)

* Wingspan: 56 ft 9 in (17.3 m)

* Height: 29 ft 11 in (8.9 m)

* Wing area: 1,542 ft² (143.3 m²)

* Airfoil: NACA 0003.46-64.069 root, NACA 0004.08-63 tip

* Empty weight: 55,560 lb (25,200 kg)

* Loaded weight: 67,871 lb (30,786 kg)

* Max takeoff weight: 176,890 lb (80,240 kg)

* Powerplant: 4× General Electric J79-GE-5A turbojet

* *Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0068

* Drag area: 10.49 ft² (0.97 m²)

* Aspect ratio: 2.09

 

Performance

 

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 (1,319mph) at 40,000 ft (12,000 m)

* Cruise speed: 610 mph (530 kn, 985 km/h)

* Combat radius: 1,740 mi (1,510 nmi, 3,220 km)

* Ferry range: 4,100 mi (4,700 nmi, 7,600 km)

* Service ceiling: 63,400 ft (19,300 m)

* Rate of climb: 17,400 ft/min (88 m/s) at gross weight[30]

* Wing loading: 44.0 lb/ft² (215 kg/m²)

* Thrust/weight: 0.919 lbf/lb

* Lift-to-drag ratio: 11.3 (without weapons/fuel pod)

 

Armament

 

* Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.79 in) T171 cannon[29]

* Bombs: 4× B-43 or B61 nuclear bombs; maximum weapons load was 19,450 lb (8,820 kg)

The display reads:

 

ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster

 

Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.

 

However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.

 

Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.

 

Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.

 

On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.

 

The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.

 

M42 Duster Specifications:

 

Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded

Height: 9 feet 4 inches

Length: 19 feet

Width: 10 feet 7 inches

Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners

Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds

Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun

Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine

Range: 100 miles

Speed 45 mph

 

The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.

 

The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.

 

Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.

 

Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.

 

Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.

 

SGT Mitchell Stout

C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge

 

The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:

 

Citation:

 

Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.

 

Taken December 13th, 2013.

The world’s top female surfers proved by pairing up grace, strength and talent, that they are capable of taking the sport to new heights.

 

The 2nd SWATCH GIRLS PRO France 2011 in Hossegor delivered a firework of spectacular surfing! Moving through the rounds, the ladies faced strong currents and fast crashing waves. Heat after heat they tackled the rough challenge by laying down outstanding performances with technical, smooth and stylish surfing. Unfortunately last year’s winner and 4-time World Champion Stephanie Gilmore (AUS) and top favourite Coco Ho (HAW) were already eliminated in the early rounds.

 

In the end Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS) defeated Sage Erickson (USA) on an epic final day of competition to win the SWATCH GIRLS PRO France at Seignosse in Hossegor.

 

Both Fitzgibbons and Erickson surfed at their limit on the final day of competition in front of the packed holiday crowd who flocked to the beach to support some of the world’s finest women’s surfers, but it was Fitzgibbons who found the scores needed to take the victory over the American surfer.

 

Fitzgibbons, who is currently rated No. 2 on the elite ASP Women’s World Title Series, competed in her second consecutive SWATCH GIRLS PRO France event and her victory marks her third major ASP win this year.

 

Erickson was impressive throughout the entire competition, eventually defeating Sarah Baum (ZAF) in the Semifinals, but was unable to surpass Fitzgibbons for the win.

 

Sarah Mason Wins 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France

 

Sarah Mason (Gisbourne, NZL) 16, today took out the ASP 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France over Dimity Stoyle (Sunshine Coast QLD, AUS) 19, it a closely contested 35-minute final that went down to the wire in tricky 3ft (1m) waves at Les Bourdaines.

 

Europe’s finest under-21 athletes faced some of the world’s best up-and-comers in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France in their attempt to qualify for the ASP World Junior Series which starts October 3, in Bali, Indonesia.

 

Mason, who impressed the entire event with her precise and stylish forehand attack, left little to chance in the 35-minute final getting off to a quick start to open her account and then built on her two-wave total to claim victory with 11.73 out of 20. The quietly spoken goofy-footer was a standout performer in the ASP 6-Star Swatch Girls Pro France and backed it up with a commanding performance against her fellow Pro Junior members.

 

“It is amazing. I am so happy and it is one of my best results for sure. It was tricky to try and pick the good ones but I picked a couple so it was great. All the girls are definitely ripping so you have to step up the level to get through your heats so I am stoked with the win. It has been super fun and I have enjoyed the entire event so to win is just amazing.”

 

Dimity Stoyle was unable to bridge the gap over her opponent in the final finishing second despite holding priority several times in the later stages of the encounter. The Swatch Girls Pro Junior France has proved the perfect training ground for Stoyle to continue with her excellent results already obtained this season on the ASP Australasia Pro Junior series where she is currently ranked nº2.

 

“I am still happy with second and I really wanted to win here but I tried my best. This is the best event I have been in so far it is really good the set up, the waves and everyone loves it. I can’t believe how good the French crowd are. They love surfing and they love us all so I am definitely going to come back.”

 

Felicity Palmateer (Perth WA, AUS) 18, ranked nº9 on the ASP Women’s Star Tour, finished equal 3rd in a low scoring tactical heat against Stoyle where positioning and priority tactics towards the final part played a major role as the frequency of set waves dropped.

 

“When I first paddled out I thought it was breaking more out the back but as the tide started to change it moved in and became a little inconsistent. At the start of the heat there were heaps of waves but then it went slow and priority came into play and I kept trying to get one. I am not really fussed because I am travelling with Dimity (Stoyle) and stoked that she has made the final.”

 

Palmateer has used the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France as a building block towards her ultimate goal of being full-time on the ASP Women’s World Tour. Her objectives are clear and 2011 is an extremely important year.

 

“I would love to get a World Junior title but at the moment my goal is to qualify for the World Tour through the Star events. If I can get more practice without that much pressure on me like this year and then if I qualify it will be even better for 2012.”

 

Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 17, placed 3rd in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France after failing to oust eventual event winner Sarah Mason in semi-final nº1. Buitendag looked dangerous throughout the final day of competition and was unlucky not to find any quality scoring waves in a slow heat. Trailing for the majority of the encounter, Buitendag secured her best ride in the final moments which proved not enough to advance.

 

“The swell definitely dropped and although the conditions were quite nice I didn’t get any good scoring waves. I have a Pro Junior event coming up in South Africa and it is very important to get a result there to qualify for the World Juniors.”

 

Maud Le Car (St Martin, FRA) 19, claimed the best result of the European contingent finishing equal 5th to jump to nº1 position on the ASP Women’s European Pro Junior series. Le Car led a low scoring quarter-final bout against Bianca Buitendag until losing priority in a tactical error which allowed her opponent to sneak under her guard and claim the modest score required to win.

 

“I didn’t surf really well in that heat and I am a little bit disappointed because it is for the selection to the World Juniors with the other European girls. The waves were not the best and it was difficult to catch some good waves and unfortunately I didn’t make it. It is really good to be at the top but I have some other contests to improve and to do some good results and to make it to the World Juniors.”

 

The Swatch Time to Tear Expression Session was won by the team composed of Swatch Girls Pro France finalists Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS), Sage Erickson (USA) and equal 3rd placed Courtney Conlogue (USA) in a dynamic display of modern progressive surfing in the punchy 3ft peaks in front of a packed surf hungry audience lining the shore.

 

The Swatch Girls Pro is webcast LIVE on www.swatchgirlspro.com

 

For all results, videos, daily highlights, photos and news log-on to www.swatchgirlsproor www.aspeurope.com

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Final Result

Sarah Mason (NZL) 11.73 Def. Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.27

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Semi-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 14.00 Def. Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 9.60

Heat 2: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.67 Def. Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.57

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Quarter-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 12.75 Def. Lakey Peterson (USA) 6.25

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 8.95 Def. Maud Le Car (FRA) 8.50

Heat 3: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 11.00 Def. Georgia Fish (AUS) 4.50

Heat 4: Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 17.00 Def. Nao Omura (JPN) 8.75

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Round Three Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 15.25, Maud Le Car (FRA) 11.00, Marie Dejean (FRA) 9.35, Camille Davila (FRA) 4.90

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 14.50, Lakey Peterson (USA) 11.50, Justine Dupont (FRA) 10.75, Phillipa Anderson (AUS) 5.10

Heat 3: Georgia Fish (AUS) 12.50, Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.15, Joanne Defay (FRA) 7.15, Loiola Canales (EUK) 2.90

Heat 4: Nao Omura (JPN) 10.00, Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 9.50, Barbara Segatto (BRA) 3.90, Ana Morau (FRA) 3.05

 

Photos Aquashot/ASPEurope - Swatch

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

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 deployed in four minor variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie, FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S for additional firepower.

The FAST Pack system was designed to enhance the VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter, and the initial V1.0 came in the form of conformal pallets that could be attached to the fighter’s leg flanks for additional fuel – primarily for Long Range Interdiction tasks in atmospheric environment. Later FAST Packs were designed for space operations.

 

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.

The versatile aircraft also underwent constant upgrade programs, leading to improved versions like the VF-1N and P. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 onwards, placed in a streamlined fairing on the upper side of the nose, just 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 also 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 wing-tips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECM measures were also mounted on some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.

 

A limited number of machines was also, when the type was replaced in the fighter units by the VF-4, handed over to U.N.S.A.F. units and modified into fighter bombers for the exclusive use within Earth's atmosphere, intended as a supplement to the dedicated VFA-1 ground attack Valkyrie variant. The machine’s prime task would be to attack and neutralize potential invaders’ landing vehicles, plus general close air support for ground troops and battlefield interdiction missions.

This conversion included structural reinforcements and additional weapon hardpoints under the air intakes, improved avionics as well as active and passive sensor systems from the VF-1P in a modified head unit with two laser cannon. These revamped aircraft received an "a" suffix (Alpha for attack, the Greek letter was chosen in order to avoid confusion with the widespread standard VF-1A variant and VF-1JA updates) to their original designation. Roundabout 120 VF-1s, mostly VF-1As, -Ns and a few -Js were converted to the a-standard between 2017 and 2019 and served at air bases in Africa, Northern America and Australia until 2032.

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 in several variants.

 

However, the fighter 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 - 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 and U.N.Spacy Marines

 

Accommodation:

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

 

Dimensions:

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;

Standard T-O 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 (1x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1x 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 T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24

 

Design Features:

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

 

Transformation:

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

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

 

Armament:

2x internal Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, 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 and 2x underfuselage 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-ship 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

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another build of one of these vintage ARII kits, primarily for the (fictional) livery. This one was inspired by a profile found in a source book (the "VF-1 Master File" from Softbank Publishing), where I found a profile of a late VF-1P from 2024 in a pale, three-tone desert paint scheme, similar to an IDF aircraft, with some white trim on the wings and a white radome. While this machine basically looked attractive, I was a little confused by its supposed operation theatre: Australia. There, over a typical outback landscape, the paint scheme would IMHO hardly work, the tones being much too light and just "wrong". From this, the idea was born to create a "Valkyroo"!

 

Since the model would rather center around the paint scheme, the VF-1, an “S” variant kit, remained basically OOB. Nevertheless, it received some standard mods and some extras. The basic updates include some additional blade antennae (leaving out the dorsal antennae for a Block 13/14 aircraft), a pilot figure and a modified dashboard. This time the VF-1 would have its landing gear extended, but the ventral gun pod was nevertheless modified to accept one of my home-made VF-1 standard display stands for in-flight beauty pics over the Australian desert.

 

Since the machine would, in its wraparound paint scheme, rather look like a low-level fighter bomber and mud mover, the ordnance was changed from a dozen AMM-1 air-to-air missiles to something grittier. I gave the kit a pair of GBUs on the inner wing stations, which are Paveway bombs from an 1:72 Hasegawa ordnance set, but modified into optically-guided weapons since the original laser sensor with its ring-shaped stabilizer would be quite large at 1:100.

On the outer pylons the VF-1 received four streamlined pods with unguided missiles, left over from KP MiG-21s which are pretty small and slender for their 1:72 scale. Under the 1:100 VF-1 they work well.

I furthermore gave it another pair of hardpoints under the air intakes, holding an ECM and a FLIR pod (both from a Dragon 1:144 RAF Tornado GR.1, the FLIR is a reversed chaff dispenser w/o fins). That’s not canonical, but this one here is fictional, anyway.

 

On the legs, small chaff/flare dispensers made from styrene strips were added, and small radar warning fairings adorn the nose and the tail. Thin styrene profile strips were added on the legs and the fins, for a little more external structure, and a small laser range finder fairing was mounted under the VF-1’s nose (also from the 1:144 Tonka).

In order to emphasize this Valkyrie's updated and modified status, I modified the horribly misshaped “S” head unit, lowering and narrowing the cranium’s rear part and reducing the number of lasers from four to just two. For the in-flight pictures a pilot figure was added to the cockpit, which also had the dashboard extended downwards to the console between the pilot’s feet.

  

Painting and markings:

The goal was to apply an effective (and potentially) attractive paint scheme that would be appropriate for the Australian desert/outback landscape, with its distinct red sand, low, pale shrubs and occasional dark rocks and trees. I checked both RAAF schemes as well as landscape pictures, and eventually created a four-tone wraparound scheme, somewhat inspired by unique RAAF DHC-4s and Pilatus Porter transporter liveries, as well as the SAC bomber scheme that was/is used on RAAF C-130. The US Army MERCD scheme also has some influence. However, the result is not a copy of an existing scheme, the scheme rather evolved gradually – even though, once it was done, it somewhat reminds of the famous Swedish “Fields & Meadows” pattern, just with lighter colors, even though this was not intended!

 

Due to the model’s small size and the potentially bright Australian theatre of operation, I did not want the disruptive scheme to become too dark. Consequently, the wraparound scheme consists of four tones: splotches of Brown Yellow (Humbrol 94) and IJN Grey Green (Tamiya XF-76), two tones with similar brightness, are the basis. Next came a medium red brown (Leather, Humbrol 62) and finally some Bronze Green (Humbrol 75), the latter intended to break up the aircraft's silhouette through a strong color contrast.

For a subtle counter-shading effect against the sky, relatively more of the Sand and IJN Grey Green was used on the undersides and the dark green was not applied underneath at all. The radome, in order to set it slightly apart from the rest of the airframe, as well as some other dielectric fairings, were painted with Hemp (Humbrol 168).

 

The cockpit became standard medium grey (Humbrol 140) with a brown seat. The landing gear was painted in classic white, while the air intakes and some other openings were painted in dark grey (Revell 77).

 

In an attempt to further subdue the aircraft's overall visual profile, I avoided any flashy trim and rather went for monochrome markings in black. The low-viz U.N. Spacy “kite” roundels were created and printed at home. The eagle emblems on the fins belong, in real life, to an F-15E prototype (Italeri kit), the tactical codes were puzzled together from A-10 and T-4 decal sheets. Most characteristic VF-1 stencils come from the OOB sheet, some lines were created with generic decal material.

Due to the model’s small size, only some light, overall dry-brushing with hemp and light grey was done, and then the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

 

A camouflaged VF-1 surely looks odd, esp. in desert colors, but there actually are several canonical aircraft painted in such a fashion, to be found in various official Macross publications - in fact, this model is the attempt to create a more plausible livery than one that I found in such a sourcebook. IMHO, the home-brew disruptive four-tone scheme for this "Valkyroo" VF-1 looks quite attractive, and thanks to the selected tones it also makes the subtle Australia connection. Those small Valkyrie kits never get boring, at least to me! :D

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

General characteristics:

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

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

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

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

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

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

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

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

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

7/14/11 cblog, I AM LOVEABLE & CAPABLE ;

ho fam art, m: "'IALAC ...I am loveable & capable ....every person is loveable ..wife will feel better if she is loved..and chance to share gifts..children cute..but..if we forget the IALAC of a person ..we lessen the self worth ..u r loveable but not capable ..or u r capable but not loveable ..we lessen the value...put down words ..keep it in mind ..in gospel today hesus values our IALAC .."take my yoke.." u will find rest for yourselves ..we all want to find rest ..remove my..jesus tells us take my yoke..what mean? 2000 yrs ago the yoke they placed was on beast of burden or on 2 men ..carry my yoke ..meaning..share the weight ..says we r capable..together..ask for grace..that he may accompany us on the cross ..how pray what pray for ..why this cross ..ls...carry with me..

 

Ex 3:13-20 "Moses, hearing the voice of the LORD from the burning bush, said to him,“When I go to the children of Israel and say to them,‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you, if they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what am I to tell them?” God replied, “I am who am.” Then he added, “This is what you shall tell the children of Israel: I AM sent me to you.” God spoke further to Moses, “Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.“This is my name forever; this my title for all generations“Go and assemble the elders of Israel, and tell them: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has appeared to me and said I am concerned about you and about the way you are being treated in Egypt; so I have decided to lead you up out of the misery of Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites a land flowing with milk and h

 

them: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has appeared to me and said I am concerned about you and about the way you are being treated in Egypt; so I have decided to lead you up out of the misery of Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites a land flowing with milk and honey.“Thus they will heed your message. Then you and the elders of Israel shall go to the king of Egypt and say to him:“The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has sent us word. Permit us, then, to go a three-days’ journey in the desert, that we may offer sacrifice to the LORD, our God.“Yet I know that the king of Egypt will not allow you to go unless he is forced I will stretch out my hand, therefore, and smite Egypt by doing all kinds of wondrous deeds there. After that he will send you away.” R. (8a) The Lord remembers his covenant for ever or R. Alleluia. Give thanks to the LORD, invoke his name; make known among the nations his deeds

 

em, and wonders in the land of Ham R. The Lord remembers his covenant for ever or R. Alleluia

 

"Jesus said 'Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened and I will give you rest Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for yourselves. For my yoke is easy, and my burden light"

  

The MOL Northern Juvenile, capable of carrying 8,800 twenty-foot equivalent units, set a record today as the largest container ship to ever call on Jacksonville. The ship, which transited the Suez Canal from Asia before reaching the U.S. east coast, loaded and offloaded cargo at JAXPORT’s TraPac Container Terminal at Dames Point.

More than 1 million containers move through Jacksonville's public and private marine terminals annually. Jacksonville boasts the widest shipping channel in the Southeast U.S., wide enough for two ships to pass at the same time and offers worldwide cargo service from more than 40 ocean carriers, including direct service with Europe, Africa, South America, the Caribbean and other key markets.

Florida is now the nation’s third most populous state – and more than 60 million U.S. consumers live within a one-day truck drive of Jacksonville’s port. JAXPORT terminals are serviced by three U.S. interstates (I-10, I-95 and I-75), and the city has 36 daily train departures via three railroads: CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Florida East Coast. The port’s equal balance of imports and exports provides backhaul opportunities, saving money and maximizing transportation costs.

JAXPORT has invested $600 million in recent infrastructure investments in everything from cranes to docks to rail and a newly authorized project to deepen the federal shipping channel.

 

Though the US Navy reconsidered its decision to retire the AD Skyraider after the Korean War, it was still a piston-engined attack aircraft designed during World War II, while the Navy preferred going to a modern, all-jet attack/fighter fleet. To supplement and then replace the AD, the Navy issued a requirement for a jet attack fighter weighing no more than 48,000 pounds, capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons, and with a speed of at least 550 miles an hour. The Navy was not surprised when Douglas’ chief designer, Edward Heinemann, submitted a proposal for a delta-winged, light attack jet—they were surprised to find that it met all of the requirements, yet weighed in at only 23,000 pounds, less than half the required weight. It was also so small that it did not need folding wings to fit on aircraft carrier elevators. Heinemann deliberately omitted as much weight as possible to bring the aircraft in under weight, and subsequently, at a lower unit cost than anticipated. One part of this effort was external structural ribbing for the rudder; this “temporary” solution would be used on every aircraft produced.

 

Heinemann’s design was quickly ordered by the Navy as the A4D Skyhawk. The first A4D-1 flew in June 1952, with deliveries to the fleet beginning in 1956. Pilots used to the increasingly larger and more powerful aircraft the US Navy fielded in the late 1950s, such as the F3H Demon and F4H Phantom II, were surprised at the diminutive A4D, which looked toylike on the decks of Forrestal-class supercarriers. It quickly earned the nicknames “Tinkertoy Bomber,” “Scooter,” and “Heinemann’s Hot Rod.”

 

The Skyhawk—redesignated A-4 in 1962—also quickly gained a reputation for reliability and nimbleness. Despite its small size, it could carry its own weight in bombs and still turn inside anything in the inventory, even the purpose-built F-8 Crusader fighter. For this reason, the Navy began assigning A-4C Skyhawks as “emergency fighter” detachments to Essex-class antisubmarine carriers, as these ships, still equipped with World War II-era hydraulic catapults and limited in deck space, could not carry the more modern F-4. Besides their internal 20mm cannon, A-4s could also carry up to four Sidewinder missiles.

 

It would be in the Vietnam War that the A-4 would prove its worth. Besides its large bombload and superb manuverability, the Skyhawk was also found to be able to take considerable punishment. Several A-4s returned to their carriers missing pieces of rudder or with holes shot through the wings. At the beginning of American involvement, the Navy began replacing the older A-4C “short-nose” models with the improved A-4E, which added a fifth hardpoint and a longer nose with more advanced avionics; this was quickly supplemented by the A-4F, which added a dorsal hump with still more avionics and ECM equipment.

 

Until the A-7 Corsair II began arriving in the fleet in the late 1960s, the A-4 represented the backbone of naval light attack units, operating alongside the A-6 Intruder in striking targets throughout Southeast Asia. On land, A-4s served with Marine Corps units, and proved so reliable and well-liked that the Marines decided not to use the A-7 at all. The Skyhawk also proved itself to be adaptable to other missions: A-4s carried out the US Navy’s first precision strike mission, a 1967 attack on the Hanoi thermal powerplant with AGM-62 Walleye missiles, and also served as Wild Weasel/Iron Hand suppression of enemy air defense aircraft, armed with AGM-45 Shrikes.

 

Though they were slower than the F-4 and F-8, and lacked the A-6’s ability to fly in the worst of inclement weather, the Skyhawk was not defenseless against enemy MiGs: it was the only American aircraft that could turn with a MiG-17 if it was “clean” of bombs, and only one A-4 was lost to enemy aircraft during the Vietnam War. In turn, one A-4, piloted by Lieutenant Commander Ted Schwartz, shot down a MiG-17 with Zuni rockets in 1967. Skyhawks would drop the first and last bombs of US Navy aircraft in the Vietnam War, and flew more sorties than any other naval aircraft—and paid a commensurate price: 362 Skyhawks were shot down or lost in accidents during the war, the most of any one type. Two A-4 pilots won the Medal of Honor during Vietnam, James Stockdale and Michael Estocin, the latter posthumously; longtime prisoner of war Everett Alvarez Jr. was also an A-4 pilot, as was fellow POW and later Presidential candidate, John McCain.

 

The A-4’s story did not end with Vietnam. Recognizing its superb manueverability, the US Navy began building adversary units with Skyhawks simulating the MiG-17 as part of the Top Gun program, beginning in 1969. These stripped down “Mongoose” A-4s proved to be a match even against far more advanced F-14 Tomcats and F-18 Hornets, and A-4s remained in the adversary role until 1998. Alongside these aircraft, the Navy used two-seat TA-4J Skyhawks as advanced trainers until 2003, while Marine units continued to use the penultimate A-4M Skyhawk in the light attack role until after the First Gulf War in 1991; Marine OA-4M “fast FAC” forward air control aircraft flew as late as 1998. The TA-4J was replaced by the T-45 Goshawk; there has never truly been a replacement for the A-4E adversaries and A-4M light attack aircraft, though the AV-8B Harrier supplemented them.

 

While Vietnam was the last war for American Skyhawks, foreign users would put the aircraft to further use. Israel would use their A-4H/Ns in the Yom Kippur War with heavy casualties, due to more advanced Egyptian and Syrian air defenses; better luck was had in the Lebanon War of 1982. Argentina’s A-4B/Qs saw extensive service over the Falklands in 1982, impressing even their British adversaries with hair-raising low-level bomb runs against British ships in San Carlos Water: though the Argentine aircraft took severe punishment from Fleet Air Arm Sea Harriers, they also sank or damaged five ships. Finally, Kuwait used their A-4KU Skyhawks from the beginning of the First Gulf War.

 

Overall, 2960 A-4s were produced and flew with the air arms of eleven nations; Argentina, Israel, Brazil, and Singapore still fly them—Brazil’s A-4s still fly from carriers, while Singapore’s A-4SUs are extensively upgraded with turbofan engines and F-16 radar. Still others survive as government contract aggressor aircraft, or in private hands, while many are preserved in museums.

 

This A-4M, 160036, spent its entire career with only three squadrons: VMA-223 ("Bulldogs") at MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina; VMA-331 ("Bumblebees") at MCAS Yuma, Arizona; and VMA-124 ("Checkerboards") at JRB Fort Worth, Texas, the latter a Reserve unit. It was retired in 1993 and was put on display at NAS Pensacola, Florida. Later it was donated to the Hampton Air Park in Virginia, and finally ended up with the Prairie Aviation Museum in Bloomington, Illinois. It has been superbly restored to its appearance when it served with VMA-223.

 

It's not often that you get to meet someone who has flown an exact aircraft on display at a museum, but I had the privilege to meet Lieutenant Colonel Chuck "Dutch" Sprietsma, USMC Retired, right after I took this picture of 160036. Sprietsma was conducting tours as part of the Prairie Aviation Museum's "open cockpit" day, and I got to talk a bit with him about A-4s--he flew this aircraft during his tour with VMA-223.

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.

 

As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.

 

The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.

 

The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

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, anyway. 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, 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.

 

By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).

 

During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)

Weight: 23 tons

Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)

Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)

Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)

 

Armour:

10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)

Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)

Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)

Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road

Power/weight: 13 PS/t

 

Engine:

Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)

 

Transmission:

ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios

 

Armament:

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

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.

 

There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…

 

However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.

  

Painting and markings:

Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.

 

The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.

 

The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.

 

The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.

 

Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.

  

A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.

 

1 2 ••• 41 42 44 46 47 ••• 79 80