View allAll Photos Tagged components
✹ To see a view of the complete box - including the lid - click here.
This box is one of 20 different boxes for sale by auction on eBay in support of survivors of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami disaster in Japan. Click here to visit / to return to the eBay listing [Item number: 120728905254]. The auction for this item closes on Friday the 3rd of June 2011 at 02:33 a.m. British Summer Time (UTC + 1).
✹ Click here to see a thumbnail overview of all the boxes, or watch a Slideshow of all the boxes.
Proceeds of the auction - after eBay and PayPal fees have been deducted - will be donated to the Japanese Red Cross Society.
✹ To see a larger, more detailed, view of this picture click on the small magnifying glass icon at the top right of the picture, then click on "View all sizes", then click on "Original" - which displays the largest and best quality image.
About the Japanese Red Cross Society
The Japanese Red Cross are one of three major fundraising organisaitions based in Japan (the other two being the Japanese broadcaster NHK and the Red Feather Central Community Chest of Japan - originally a post World War II re-building organisation). You can download two english language reports relating to the disaster from the Japanese Red Cross website:
Operations Update No.1 - 13th April 2011 [.pdf file, retrieved 17th May 2011]
Operations Update No.2 - 6th May 2011 [.pdf file, retrieved 17th May 2011]
Over two months on, the needs of many of the survivors remain desperately basic. There has been an increased incidence of pneumonia and associated fatalities. As well as helping with practical and medical requirements, the Japanese Red Cross Society are helping people deal with "Shell Shock" / Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and further developing services to address these issues.
Perhaps most impressively, they helped quickly set up a management structure to co-ordinate help from all the major fundraisers, a committee including academics and representatives from the 15 most badly affected prefectures [local governments]. The pre-existing local Red Cross chapters [branches] are helping with governance.
Although Japan has a large economy, and domestically the japanese have been hugely generous towards aid efforts, like everywhere else, many people of course are not personally rich. There is still epic upheaval. Much of welfare is normally provided by family and community, a system that breaks down when whole barrios are fragmented and diminished. Services like adoption and fostering, for example - normally always done by relatives - are having to be developed. A planning policy of building schools on higher ground saved many children, but even after encouraging teachers back out of retirement, there is still a shortage of experienced teachers. Japan is mostly mountains and sea, with very little spare land suitable for building, and so - while rebuilding takes place - temporary accommodation has had to be built on land normally reserved for other activities, for example on school playgrounds.
If you enjoy shopping in support of the Japanese Red Cross Society, you might also like Tomodachi Calling, a cafepress web store / shop (recommend by a fellow flickrer schmid91, who helped document the aftermath of the tsunami in Ishinomaki Myagi prefecture).
Japan based english language online newspapers
About the decorative hexagonal origami gift box
The box is made up from 12 square origami papers - 6 for the lid and 6 for the base. No cutting, glue or adhesive tape is used.
Although Japan has a long tradition of paper folding, the design of the box is modern, by Tomoko Fuse 布施 知子, who is a renown unit origami designer and artist. Unit origami is a method of building up models using pre-folded components or units.
If you are an accurate and consistent paper folder, but are new to unit origami, and you would like to make your own box, I would recommend her book "Origami Boxes: Moribana Style" [# ISBN-10: 0870408216 - # ISBN-13: 978-0870408212] as an excellent introduction. Connecting the units together can be a bit fiddly at first, and the book also includes designs for more simple square and triangular boxes, which give the opportunity to practice and develop the skills needed for doing the final assembly.
(Until Asimo gets a bit more nimble fingered, the box is unlikely to flood the market anytime soon...)
If you get the bug, she has also created and written about very much more complex models. "Unit Origami: Multidimensional Transformations" [ISBN-10: 0870408526 - ISBN-13: 978-0870408526] is considered a classic text on the subject.
Paper making was a traditional supplemental business of farmers in Japan during the winter. The very cold water during that season enabled the fibres in the pulp to be soaked without becoming subject to decay, and some also argue that cold shrinks the fibres, creating a finer, crisper paper.
An 803 vacuum tube (pentode), made in 1942 for the US navy by Westinghouse. This beast was intended for radio transmitters, and can push 200W at 2000V.
The filament alone draws 50W!
In conjunction with CyberClimb and Legado Video, we produced a business legacy video for Component Manufacturing and Reaves Creating Systems. The video aids …
www.arrivalelectronics.co.uk/manufacturing Arrival Electronics delivers a full variety of Managed Electronic...
Read more about Component Manufacturing
(Posted by a Precision Machining China Manufacturer)
The insides of an 803 transmitting vacuum tube. The number n the center column is 96393. One of the leads is wrapped in what appears to be asbestos.
034/365 polyptych
Some shots from an abandoned refinery in CA. There are technically 4 photos in this image including the texture which was shot in the same location.
Prints available from lexmachine.etsy.com
+++ 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 Panther tank, officially Panzerkampfwagen V Panther (abbreviated PzKpfw V) with ordnance inventory designation Sd.Kfz. 171, was a German medium tank of World War II. It was used on the Eastern and Western Fronts from mid-1943 to the end of the war. The Panther was intended to counter the Soviet T-34 medium tank and to replace the Panzer III and Panzer IV. Nevertheless, it served alongside the Panzer IV and the heavier Tiger I until the end of the war. It is considered one of the best tanks of World War II for its excellent firepower, protection, and mobility although its reliability in early times were less impressive.
The Panther was a compromise. While having essentially the same Maybach V12 petrol (700 hp) engine as the Tiger I, it had better gun penetration, was lighter and faster, and could traverse rough terrain better than the Tiger I. The trade-off was weaker side armor, which made it vulnerable to flanking fire. The Panther proved to be effective in open country and long-range engagements.
The Panther was far cheaper to produce than the heavy Tiger I. Key elements of the Panther design, such as its armor, transmission, and final drive, were simplifications made to improve production rates and address raw material shortages. Despite this the overall design remain described by some as "overengineered". The Panther was rushed into combat at the Battle of Kursk in the summer of 1943 despite numerous unresolved technical problems, leading to high losses due to mechanical failure. Most design flaws were rectified by late 1943 and early 1944, though the bombing of production plants, increasing shortages of high-quality alloys for critical components, shortage of fuel and training space, and the declining quality of crews all impacted the tank's effectiveness.
Though officially classified as a medium tank, at 44.8 metric tons the Panther was closer to a heavy tank weight and the same category as the American M26 Pershing (41.7 tons), British Churchill (40.7 tons) and the Soviet IS-2 (46 tons) heavy tanks. The Panther's weight caused logistical problems, such as an inability to cross certain bridges, otherwise the tank had a very high power-to-weight ratio which made it highly mobile.
The Panther was only used marginally outside of Germany, mostly captured or recovered vehicles, some even after the war. Japan already received in 1943 a specimen for evaluation. During March–April 1945, Bulgaria received 15 Panthers of various makes (D, A, and G variants) from captured and overhauled Soviet stocks; they only saw limited (training) service use. In May 1946, Romania received 13 Panther tanks from the USSR, too.
After the war, France was able to recover enough operable vehicles and components to equip its army and offer vehicles for sale. The French Army's 503e Régiment de Chars de Combat was equipped with a force of 50 Panthers from 1944 to 1947, in the 501st and 503rd Tank Regiments. These remained in service until they were replaced by French-built ARL 44 heavy tanks.
In 1946, Sweden sent a delegation to France to examine surviving specimens of German military vehicles. During their visit, the delegates found a few surviving Panthers and had one shipped to Sweden for further testing and evaluation, which continued until 1961.
However, this was not the Panther’s end of service. The last appearance by WWII German tanks on the world’s battlefields came in 1967, when Syria’s panzer force faced off against modern Israeli armor. Quite improbably, Syria had assembled a surprisingly wide collection of ex-Wehrmacht vehicles from a half-dozen sources over a decade and a half timeframe. This fleet consisted primarily of late production Panzer V, StuGIII and Jagdpanzer IVs, plus some Hummel SPAAGs and a handful Panthers. The tanks were procured from France, Spain, and Czechoslovakia, partly revamped before delivery.
All of the Panthers Syria came from Czechoslovakia. Immediately after Germany’s collapse in May 1945, the Soviet army established a staging area for surrendered German tanks at a former Wehrmacht barracks at Milovice, about 24 miles north of Prague, Czechoslovakia. By January 1946, a total of roughly 200 operational Panzer IVs and Panthers of varying versions were at this facility. Joining them was a huge cache of spare parts found at a former German tank repair depot in Teplice, along with ammunition collected from all over Czechoslovakia and the southern extremity of the Soviet occupation zone in Germany. Throughout 1946, the Czechoslovak government’s clean-up of WWII battlefields recovered more than one hundred further tank wrecks, of which 80 were pieced back together to operational status and handed over to the Czechoslovakian Army,
In early 1948, the now-nationalized CKD Works began a limited upkeep of the tanks, many of which had not had depot-level overhauls since the war. A few were rebuilt with a Czechoslovak-designed steering system, but this effort was halted due to cost. These tanks remained operational in the Czechoslovak army until the end of 1954, when sufficient T-34s were available to phase them out.
A Syrian military delegation visited Prague from 8 April – 22 April 1955. An agreement was struck for the sale, amongst other items, of 45 Panzer IVs and 15 Panthers. Despite their obsolescence the Czechoslovaks were not about to just give the tanks away and demanded payment in a ‘hard’ western currency, namely British pounds. The cost was £4,500 each (£86,000 or $112,850 in 2016 money), far above what they were probably worth militarily, especially considering the limited amount of foreign currency reserves available to the Damascus government. The deal included refurbishment, a full ammunition loadout for each, and a limited number of spare parts. Nonetheless, the deal was closed, and the tanks’ delivery started in early November 1955.
The Syrians were by that time already having dire problems keeping their French-sourced panzers operational, and in 1958, a second contract was signed with CKD Works for 15 additional Panzer IVs and 10 more Panthers, these being in lesser condition or non-operational, for use as spare parts hulks. An additional 16 refurbished Maybach engines for both types were also included in this contract, as well as more ammunition.
The refurbished Panthers for Syria had their original 7.5 cm KwK 42 L70 replaced with the less powerful Rheinmetall 7.5 cm KwK 40 L48 gun – dictated by the fact that this gun was already installed in almost all other Syrian tanks of German origin and rounds for the KwK 42 L70 were not available anymore. and the Panther’s full ammo load was 87 rounds. The KwK 40 L48 fired a standard APCBC shell at 750 m/s and could penetrate 109 mm (4.3 in) hardened steel at 1.000 m range. This was enough to take out an M4 Sherman at this range from any angle under ideal circumstances. With an APCR shell the gun was even able to penetrate 130 mm (5.1 in) of hardened steel at the same distance.
Outwardly, the gun switch was only recognizable through the shorter barrel with a muzzle brake, the German WWII-era TZF.5f gunsight was retained by the Syrians. Additionally, there were two secondary machine guns, either MG-34s or MG-42s, one coaxial with the main gun and a flexible one in a ball mount in the tank’s front glacis plate.
A few incomplete Panther hulls without turret were also outfitted with surplus Panzer IV turrets that carried the same weapon, but the exact share of them among the Syrian tanks is unknown – most probably less than five, and they were among the batch delivered in the course of the second contract from 1958.
As they had been lumped all together in Czechoslovak army service, the Syrians received a mixed bag of Panzer IV and Panther versions, many of them “half-breeds” or “Frankensteins”. Many had the bow machine gun removed, either already upon delivery or as a later field modification, and in some cases the machine gun in the turret was omitted as well.
An obvious modification of the refurbished Czech export Panthers for Syria was the installation of new, lighter road wheels. These were in fact adapted T-54 wheels from Czechoslovakian license production that had just started in 1957 - instead of revamping the Panthers’ original solid steel wheels, especially their rubberized tread surfaces, it was easier to replace them altogether, what also made spare parts logistics easier. The new wheels had almost the same diameter as the original German road wheels from WWII, and they were simply adapted to the Panther’s attachment points of the torsion bar suspension’s swing arms. Together with the lighter main gun and some other simplifications, the Syrian Panthers’ empty weight was reduced by more than 3 tonnes.
The Czechoslovaks furthermore delivered an adapter kit to mount a Soviet-made AA DShK 12.7mm machine gun to the commander cupola. This AA mount had originally been developed after WWII for the T-34 tank, and these kits were fitted to all initial tanks of the 1955 order. Enough were delivered that some could be installed on a few of the Spanish- / French-sourced tanks, too.
It doesn’t appear that the Czechoslovaks updated the radio fit on any of the ex-German tanks, and it’s unclear if the Syrians installed modern Soviet radios. The WWII German Fu 5 radio required a dedicated operator (who also manned the bow machine gun); if a more modern system was installed not requiring a dedicated operator, this crew position could be eliminated altogether, what favored the deletion of the bow machine gun on many ex-German Syrian tanks. However, due to their more spacious hull and turret, many Panthers were apparently outfitted with a second radio set and used as command tanks – visible through a second whip antenna on the hull.
A frequent domestic Panther upgrade were side skirts to suppress dust clouds while moving and to prevent dust ingestion into the engines and clogged dust filters. There was no standardized solution, though, and solutions ranged from simple makeshift rubber skirts bolted to the tanks’ flanks to wholesale transplants from other vehicles, primarily Soviet tanks. Some Panthers also had external auxiliary fuel tanks added to their rear, in the form of two 200 l barrels on metal racks of Soviet origin. These barrels were not directly connected with the Panther’s fuel system, though, but a pump-and-hose kit was available to re-fuel the internal tanks from this on-board source in the field. When empty or in an emergency - the barrels were placed on top of the engine bay and leaking fuel quite hazardous - the barrels/tanks could be jettisoned by the crew from the inside.
Inclusive of the cannibalization hulks, Syria received a total of roughly 80 former German tanks from Czechoslovakia. However, at no time were all simultaneously operational and by 1960, usually only two or three dozen were combat-ready.
Before the Six Day War, the Syrian army was surprisingly unorganized, considering the amount of money being pumped into it. There was no unit larger than a brigade, and the whole Syrian army had a sort of “hub & spokes” system originating in Damascus, with every individual formation answering directly to the GHQ rather than a chain of command. The Panthers, Panzer IVs and StuG IIIs were in three independent tank battalions, grossly understrength, supporting the normal tank battalions of three infantry brigades (the 8th, 11th, and 19th) in the Golan Heights. The Jagdpanzer IVs were in a separate independent platoon attached to a tank battalion operating T-34s and SU-100s. How the Hummel SPGs were assigned is unknown.
The first active participation of ex-German tanks in Syrian service was the so-called “Water War”. This was not really a war but rather a series of skirmishes between Israel and Syria during the mid-1960s. With increasing frequency starting in 1964, Syria emplaced tanks on the western slope of the Golan Heights, almost directly on the border, to fire down on Israeli irrigation workers and farmers in the Galilee region. Surprisingly (considering the small number available) Syria chose the Panzer IV for this task. It had no feature making it better or worse than any other tank; most likely the Syrians felt they were the most expendable tanks in their inventory as Israeli counterfire was expected. The panzers were in defilade (dug in) and not easy to shoot back at; due to their altitude advantage.
In 1964, Syria announced plans to divert 35% of the Jordan River’s flow away from Israel, to deprive the country of drinking water. The Israelis responded that they would consider this an act of war and, true to their word, engaged the project’s workers with artillery and sniper fire. Things escalated quickly; in 1965, Israeli M4 Shermans on Israeli soil exchanged fire with the Syrian Panzer IVs above inconclusively. A United Nations peacekeeping team ordered both sides to disengage from the border for a set period of time to “cool off”, but the UN “Blue Berets” were detested and considered useless by both the Israelis and Syrians, and both sides used the lull to prepare their next move. When the cooling-off period ended, the Syrians moved Panzer IVs and now some Panthers, too, back into position. However, the IDF had now Centurion tanks waiting for them, with their fire arcs pre-planned out. The Cold War-era Centurion had heavy armor, a high-velocity 105mm gun, and modern British-made optics. It outclassed the WWII panzers in any imaginable way and almost immediately, two Syrian Panzer IVs and a Panther were destroyed. Others were abandoned by their crews and that was the end of the situation.
Syria’s participation in the Six Say War that soon followed in 1967 war was sloppy and ultimately disastrous. Israel initially intended the conflict to be limited to a preemptive strike against Egypt to forestall an imminent attack by that country, with the possibility of having to fight Syria and Jordan defensively if they responded to the operations against Egypt. The war against Egypt started on 5 June 1967. Because of the poor organization of the Syrian army, news passed down from Damascus on the fighting in the Sinai was scarce and usually outdated by the time it reached the brigade level. Many Syrian units (including the GHQ) were using civilian shortwave radios to monitor Radio Cairo which was spouting off outlandish claims of imaginary Egyptian victories, even as Israeli divisions were steamrolling towards the Suez Canal.
Syrian vehicles of German origin during the Six Day War were either painted overall in beige or in a dark olive drab green. Almost all had, instead of tactical number codes, the name of a Syrian soldier killed in a previous war painted on the turret in white. During the Six Day War, no national roundel was typically carried, even though the Syrian flag was sometimes painted to the turret flanks. However just as the conflict was starting, white circles were often painted onto the top sides of tanks as quick ID markings for aircraft, and some tanks had red recognition triangles added to the side areas: Syrian soldiers were notoriously trigger-happy, and the decreased camouflage effect was likely cancelled out by the reduced odds of being blasted by a comrade!
During the evening of 5 June, Syrian generals in Damascus urged the government to take advantage of the situation and mount an immediate invasion of Israel. Planning and preparation were literally limited to a few hours after midnight, and shortly after daybreak on 6 June, Syrian commanders woke up with orders to invade Israel. The three infantry brigades in the Golan, backed up by several independent battalions, were to spearhead the attack as the rest of the Syrian army mobilized.
There was no cohesion at all: Separate battalions began their advance whenever they happened to be ready to go, and brigades went forward, missing subunits that lagged behind. A platoon attempting a southern outflank maneuver tried to ford the Jordan River in the wrong spot and was washed away. According to a KGB report, at least one Syrian unit “exhibited cowardice” and ignored its orders altogether.
On 7 June, 24 hours into their attack, Syrian forces had only advanced 2 miles into Israel. On 8 June, the IDF pushed the Syrians back to the prewar border and that afternoon, Israeli units eliminated the last Egyptian forces in the Sinai and began a fast redeployment of units back into Israel. Now the Syrians were facing serious problems.
On 9 June, Israeli forces crossed into the Golan Heights. They came by the route the Syrians least expected, an arc hugging the Lebanese border. Now for the first time, Syria’s panzers (considered too slow and fragile for the attack) were encountered. The next day, 10 June 1967, was an absolute rout as the Syrians were being attacked from behind by IDF units arcing southwards from the initial advance, plus Israel’s second wave coming from the west. It was later estimated that Syria lost between 20-25% of its total military vehicle inventory in a 15-hour span on 10 June, including eight Panthers. A ceasefire was announced at midnight, ending Syria’s misadventure. Syria permanently lost the Golan Heights to Israel.
By best estimate, Syria had just five Panthers and twenty-five Panzer IVs fully operational on 6 June 1967, with maybe another ten or so tanks partially operational or at least functional enough to take into combat. Most – if not all – of the ex-French tanks were probably already out of service by 1967, conversely the entire ex-Spanish lot was in use, along with some of the ex-Czechoslovak vehicles. The conflict’s last kill was on 10 June 1967 when a Panzer IV was destroyed by an Israeli M50 Super Sherman (an M4 Sherman hull fitted with a new American engine, and a modified turret housing Israeli electronics and a high-velocity French-made 75mm gun firing HEAT rounds). Like the Centurion, the Super Sherman outclassed the Panzer IV, and the Panther only fared marginally better.
Between 1964-1973 the USSR rebuilt the entire Syrian military from the ground up, reorganizing it along Warsaw Pact lines and equipping it with gear strictly of Soviet origin. There was no place for ex-Wehrmacht tanks and in any case, Czechoslovakia had ended spares & ammo support for the Panzer IV and the Panthers, so the types had no future. The surviving tanks were scrapped in Syria, except for a single Panzer IV survivor sold to a collector in Jordan.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander, gunner, loader, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 50 tonnes (55.1 long tons; 45.5 short tons)
Length: 6.87 m (22 ft 6 in) hull only
7.52 m (24 ft 7¾ in) overall with gun facing forward
Width: 3.42 m (11 ft 3 in) hull only
3,70 m (12 ft 1¾ in) with retrofitted side skirts
Height: 2.99 m (9 ft 10 in)’
Ground clearance: 56 cm (22 in)
Suspension: Double torsion bar, interleaved road wheels
Fuel capacity: 720 liters (160 imp gal; 190 US gal),
some Syrian Panthers carried two additional external 200 l fuel drums
Armor:
15–80 mm (0.6 – 3.93 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 56 km/h (35 mph)
Operational range: 250 km (160 mi) on roads; 450 km (280 mi)with auxiliary fuel tanks
100 km (62 mi) cross-country
Power/weight: 14 PS (10.1 kW)/tonne (12.7 hp/ton)
Engine & transmission:
Maybach HL230 V-12 gasoline engine with 700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW)
ZF AK 7-200 gearbox with 7 forward 1 reverse gear
Armament:
1× 7,5 cm KwK 40 (L/48) with 87 rounds
2× 7.92 mm MG 34 or 42, or similar machine guns;
one co-axial with the main gun, another in the front glacis plate
with a total of 5.100 rounds (not always mounted)
Provision for a 12.7 mm DShK or Breda anti-aircraft machine gun on the commander cupola
The kit and its assembly:
A rather exotic what-if model, even though it’s almost built OOB. Inspiration came when I stumbled upon the weird Syrian Panzer IVs that were operated against Israel during the Six Day War – vehicles you would not expect there, and after more than 20 years after WWII. But when I did some more research, I was surprised about the numbers and the variety of former German tanks that Syria had gathered from various European countries, and it made me wonder if the Panther could not have been among this shaggy fleet, too?
I had a surplus Dragon Panther Spähpanzer in The Stash™, to be correct a “PzBeobWg V Ausf. G”, an observation and artillery fire guidance conversion that actually existed in small numbers, and I decided to use it as basis for this odd project. The Dragon kit has some peculiarities, though: its hull is made from primed white metal and consists of an upper and lower half that are held together by small screws! An ambiguous design, because the parts do not fit as good as IP parts, so that the model has a slightly die-cast-ish aura. PSR is necessary at the seams, but due to the metal it’s not easy to do. Furthermore, you have to use superglue everywhere, just as on a resin kit. On the other side, surface details are finely molded and crisp, even though many bits have to be added manually. However, the molded metal pins that hold the wheels are very robust and relatively thin – a feature I exploited for a modified running gear (see below).
For the modified Panther in my mind I had to retrograde the turret back to a late standard turret with mantlet parts left over from a Hasegawa kit – they fitted perfectly! The PzBeobWg V only comes with a stubby gun barrel dummy. But I changed the armament, anyway, and implanted an aftermarket white metal and brass KwK 40 L48, the weapon carried by all Syrian Panzer IVs, the Jagdpanzer IVs as well as the StuG IIIs. This standardization would IMHO make sense, even if it meant a performance downgrade from the original, longer KwK 42 L70.
For a Syrian touch, inspired by installations on the Panzer IVs, I added a mount for a heavy DShK machine gun on the commander’s cupola, which is a resin aftermarket kit from Armory Models Group (a kit that consists of no less than five fiddly parts for just a tiny machine gun!).
To change and modernize the Panther’s look further, I gave it side skirts, leftover from a ModelCollect T-72 kit, which had to be modified only slightly to fit onto the molded side skirt consoles on the Panther’s metal hull. A further late addition were the fuel barrels from a Trumpeter T-54 kit that I stumbled upon when I looked for the skirts among my pile of tank donor parts. Even though they look like foreign matter on the Panther’s tail, their high position is plausible and similar to the original arrangement on many Soviet post-WWII tanks. The whip antennae on turret and hull were created with heated black sprue material.
As a modern feature and to change the Panther’s overall look even more, I replaced its original solid “dish” road wheels with T-54/55 “starfish” wheels, which were frequently retrofitted to T-34-85s during the Fifties. These very fine aftermarket resin parts (all real-world openings are actually open, and there’s only little flash!) came from OKB Grigorovich from Bulgaria. The selling point behind this idea is/was that the Panther and T-54/55 wheels have almost the same diameter: in real life it’s 860 vs. 830 mm, so that the difference in 1:72 is negligible. Beneficially, the aftermarket wheels came in two halves, and these were thin enough to replace the Panther’s interleaved wheels without major depth problems.
Adapting the parts to the totally different wheel arrangement was tricky, though, especially due to the Dragon kit’s one-piece white metal chassis that makes any mods difficult. My solution: I retained the inner solid wheels from the Panther (since they are hardly visible in the “3rd row”), plus four pairs of T-54/55 wheels for the outer, more rows of interleaved wheels. The “inner” T-54/55 wheel halves were turned around, received holes to fit onto the metal suspension pins and scratched hub covers. The “outside” halves were taken as is but received 2 mm spacer sleeves on their back sides (styrene tube) for proper depth and simply to improve their hold on the small and rounded metal pin tips. This stunt worked better than expected and looks really good, too!
Painting and markings:
Basically very simple, and I used pictures of real Syrian Panzer IVs as benchmark. I settled for the common green livery variant, and though simple and uniform, I tried to add some “excitement” to it and attempted to make old paint shine through. The hull’s lower surface areas were first primed with RAL 7008 (Khakigrau, a rather brownish tone), then the upper surfaces were sprayed with a lighter sand brown tone, both applied from rattle cans.
On top of that, a streaky mix of Revell 45 and 46 – a guesstimate for the typical Syrian greyish, rather pale olive drab tone - was thinly applied with a soft, flat brush, so that the brownish tones underneath would shine through occasionally. Once dry, the layered/weathered effect was further emphasized through careful vertical wet-sanding and rubbing on all surfaces with a soft cotton cloth.
The rubber side skirts were painted with an anthracite base and the dry-brushed with light grey and beige.
The model then received an overall washing with a highly thinned mix of grey and dark brown acrylic artist paint. The vinyl tracks (as well as the IP spare track links on the hull) were painted, too, with a mix of grey, red brown and iron, all acrylic paints, too, that do not interact chemically with the soft vinyl.
The decals/markings are minimal; the Arabian scribble on the turret (must be a name?), using the picture of a Syrian Panzer IV as benchmark, was painted in white by hand, as well as the white circle on the turret roof. The orange ID triangles are a nice contrast, even though I was not able to come up with real-life visual evidence for them. I just found a color picture of a burned T-34-85 wreck with them, suggesting that the color was a dull orange red and not florescent orange, as claimed in some sources. I also found illustrations of the triangles as part of 1:35 decal sets for contemporary Syrian T-34-85s from FC Model Trend and Star Models, where they appear light red. For the model, they were eventually cut out from decal sheet material (TL-Modellbau, in a shade called “Rotorange”, what appears to be a good compromise).
Dry-brushing with light grey and beige to further emphasize edges and details followed. Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic vanish overall, and some additional very light extra dry-brushing with silver was done to simulate flaked paint. Dirt and rust residues were added here and there with watercolors. After final assembly, the lower areas of the model were furthermore powdered with mineral pigments to simulate dust.
The idea of a modernized WWII Panther: a simple idea that turned into a major conversion. With the resin DShK machine gun and T-54/55 wheel set the costs of this project escalated a little, but in hindsight I find that the different look and the mix of vintage German and modern Soviet elements provide this Panther with that odd touch that sets it apart from a simple paint/marking variation? I really like the outcome, and I think that the effort was worthwhile - this fictional Panther shoehorns well into its intended historical framework. :-D
Title: Symmetrical Components Seminar
Digital Publisher: Digital: Cushing Memorial Library and Archives, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
Physical Publisher: Physical: Graphic Services, Texas A&M University
Date Issued: 2011-08-17
Date Created: 1968
Dimensions: 4 x 5 inches
Format Medium: Photographic negative
Type: image
Identifier: Photograph Location: Graphic Services Photos, Box 21, File 21-155
Rights: It is the users responsibility to secure permission from the copyright holders for publication of any materials. Permission must be obtained in writing prior to publication. Please contact the Cushing Memorial Library for further information
NON HINDUS
ARE NOT ALLOWED INSIDE THE TEMPLE
Lingaraj Temple is a Hindu temple dedicated to Harihara, a form of Shiva and is one of the oldest temples in Bhubaneswar, the capital of the East Indian state of Odisha (formerly Orissa). The temple is the most prominent landmark of the Bhubaneswar city and one of the major tourist attractions of the state.
The Lingaraj temple is the largest temple in Bhubaneswar. The central tower of the temple is 55 m tall. The temple represents the quintessence of the Kalinga Architecture and culminates the medieval stages of the architectural tradition at Bhubaneswar. The temple is believed to be built by the kings from the Somavamsi dynasty, with later additions from the Ganga rulers. The temple is built in the Deula style that has four components namely, vimana (structure containing the sanctum), jagamohana (assembly hall), natamandira (festival hall) and bhoga-mandapa (hall of offerings), each increasing in the height to its predecessor. The temple complex has 50 other shrines and is enclosed by a large compound wall.
Bhubaneswar is called the Ekamra Kshetra as the deity of Lingaraj was originally under a mango tree (Ekamra) as noted in Ekamra Purana, a 13th-century Sanskrit treatise. The temple is active in worship practises, unlike most other temples in Bhubaneswar and Shiva is worshipped as Harihara, a combined form of Vishnu and Shiva. The temple has images of Vishnu, possibly because of the rising prominence of Jagannath cult emnating from the Ganga rulers who built the Jagannath Temple in Puri in the 12th century.
Lingaraj temple is maintained by the Temple Trust Board and the Archeological Survey of India (ASI). The temple has an average of 6,000 visitors per day and receives lakhs of visitors during festivals. Shivaratri festival is the major festival celebrated in the temple and event during 2012 witnessed 200,000 visitors.
HISTORY
Lingaraj means "The king of Lingam", the symbol of Saivism. Shiva was worshipped as Kirtivasa and later as Harihara and is commonly referred as Tribhuvaneshwara (also called Bhubaneswar), the master of three worlds, namely, heaven, earth and netherworld). His consort is called Bhuvaneshvari.
The temple is more than 1100 years old, dating back in its present form to the last decade of the eleventh century, though there is evidence that part of the temple was built during the sixth century CE as the temple has been emphasized in some of the seventh century Sanskrit texts. Fergusson believes the temple might have been initiated by Lelat Indra Kesari who reigned from 615 to 657 CE. The Assembly hall (jagamohana), sanctum and temple tower wer built during the eleventh century, while the Hall of offering (bhoga-mandapa) was built during the twelfth century. The natamandira was built by the wife of Salini between 1099 and 1104 CE. By the time the Lingaraj temple was completely constructed, the Jagannath (form of Vishnu) cult had been growing in the region, which historians believe is evidenced by the co-existence of Vishnu and Shiva worship at the temple. The Ganga dynasty kings were ardent followers of Vaishnavism and built the Jagannath Temple at Puri in the 12th century.
The temple is believed to be built by the Somavanshi king Jajati Keshari, in 11th century CE. Jajati Keshari had shifted his capital from Jajpur to Bhubaneswar which was referred to as Ekamra Kshetra in the Brahma Purana, an ancient scripture. One of the Somavamsi queens donated a village to the temple and the Brahmins attached to the temple received generous grants. An inscription from the Saka year 1094 (1172 CE) indicates gifts of gold coins to the temple by Rajaraja II. Another inscription of Narasimha I from the 11th century indicates offer of beetel leaves as tambula to the presiding deity. Other stone inscriptions in the temple indicate royal grants from Chodaganga to village people.
ARCHITECTURE
The Lingaraj temple is the largest temple in Bhubaneswar. James Ferugsson (1808–86), a noted critic and historian, rated the temple as "one of the finest examples of purely Hindu temple in India". It is enshrined within a spacious compound wall of laterite measuring 160 m by 142 m. The wall is 2.3 m thick and surmounted by a plain slant coping. Alongside the inner face of the boundary wall, there is a terrace to protect the compound wall against outside aggression. The tower is 55 m high and the complex has 150 smaller shrines in its spacious courtyard. Each inch of the 55 m tall tower is sculpted. The door in the gate of the entrance porch is made of sandalwood.
The Lingaraja temple faces east and is built of sandstone and laterite. The main entrance is located in the east, while there are small entrances in the north and south. The temple is built in the Deula style that has four components namely, vimana (structure containing the sanctum), jagamohana (assembly hall), natamandira (festival hall) and bhoga-mandapa (hall of offerings). The dance hall was associated with the raising prominence of the devadasi system that existed during the time. The various units from the Hall of offering to the tower of the sanctum increase in height.
The bhogamandapa (Hall of offering) measures 13 m by 13 m from the inside, 17.15 m by 17.25 m from the outside and has four doors in each of the sides. The exterior walls of the hall has decorative sculptures of men and beast. The hall has a pyramidal roof made of up several horizontal layers arranged in sets of two with intervening platform. It bears an inverted bell and a kalasa in the top. The natamandira (festival hall) measures 12 m by 12 m from the inside, 15 m by 15 m from the outside, has one main entrance and two side entrances. The side walls of the hall has decortive sculptures displaying women and couples. It has a flat roof sloping in stages. There are thick pylons inside the hall. The jagamohana (assembly hall) measures 11 m by 9.1 m from the inside, 17 m by 15 m from the outside, entrances from south and north and has a 30 metres tall roof. The hall has a pyramidal roof made of up several horizontal layers arranged in sets of two with intervening platform as in the Hall of offering. The facade to the entrances are decorated with perforated windows with lion sitting on hind legs. The inverted bell above second unit is adorned by kalasa and lions. The rekha deula has a 60 m tall pyramidal tower over the sanctum and measures 6.7 m from the inside, 16 m from the outside over the sanctum. It is covered with decorative design and seated lion projecting from the walls. The sanctum is square in shape from the inside. The tower walls are sculpted with female figures in different poses.
RELIGIOUS SIGNIFICANCE
Bhubaneswar is called the Ekamra Kshetra as the deity of Lingaraj was originally under a mango tree (Ekamra). Ekamra Purana, a Sanskrit treatise of the 13th century mentions that the presiding deity was not seen as lingam (an aniconic form of Shiva) during the Satya and Treta yugas and only during the Dwapara and Kali yugas, it emerged as a lingam. The lingam in the temple is a natural unshaped stone that rests on a Sakti. Such a lingam is called Krutibasa or Swayambhu and is found in 64 places in different parts of India. With the advent of the Ganga dynasty in the early 12th century, who had Vaishnavaite orientation, a new movement started resulting in the synthesis of Saivism and Vaishnavism. The Ekamra was associated with Vaishanavite gods Krishna and Balaram during the period. It is attributed the raising prominence of Jagannath cult that became predominant during the construction of the temple. The Ganges remodelled the temple and introduced certain Vaishnavite elements like images of Vaishnava Dwarapalas namely Jaya and Prachanda, Jagannatha, Lakshmi Narayan and Garuda were installed. Tulsi leaves, which are favoured by Vishnu, was used along with Bela leaves for the worship of Lingaraj. Lingaraja was thus came to be known as Harihara, a combination of Shiva and Vishnu. The flag of the temple was fixed to a Pinaka bow instead of trident usually found in Shiva temples. The temple priests also changed the mark in their forehead from horizontal to a "U" sign with a dotted middle line. The Ganges also introduced certain fairs like Swing festival, Sun worship and mock quarell between priests after chariot festival, similar to the practises in Jagannath Temple in Puri. The influence of the Ganges dynasty has led to a cosmopolitan culture, that has reduced the status of Lingaraja temple as a distinct Saivite shrine.
FESTIVAL & WORSHIP PRACTISES
As per Hindu legend, an underground river originating from the Lingaraj temple fills the Bindusagar Tank (meaning ocean drop) and the water is believed to heal physical and spiritual illness. The water from the tank is thus treated sacred and pilgrims take a holy dip during festive occasions. The central deity of the temple, Lingaraj, is worshipped both as Shiva and Vishnu. The harmony between the two sects of Hinduism, Saivism and Vaishanvism, is seen in this temple where the deity is worshipped as Harihara, a combined form of Vishnu and Shiva.
Shivaratri is the main festival celebrated annually in Phalgun month when thousands of devotees visit the temple. Apart from a full day of fasting, bel leaves are offered to Lingaraj on this auspicious day. The main celebrations take place at night when devotees pray all night long. The devout usually break their fast after the Mahadipa (a huge lamp) is lit on the spire of the temple. Every year the chariot festival (Ratha-Yatra) of Lingaraja is celebrated on Ashokashtami. The deity is taken in a chariot to Rameshwar Deula temple. Thousands of devotees follow and pull brightly decorated chariots containing the idols of Lingaraj and his sister Rukmani. This chariot procession stays for five days at the Rameshwar Temple and then will be brought back. This festival commemorates Lord Lingaraj having slayed a demon. Thousands of bol bom pilgrims carry water from river Mahanadi and walk all the way to the temple during the month of Shravana every year. Sunian day is observed from royal times in the month of Bhandra, a day when temple servants, peasants and other holders of temple lands offer loyalty and tribute to Lingaraja. Candan Yatra (Sandalwood ceremony) is a 22-day festival celebrated in the temple when servants of the temple disport themselves in a specially made barge in Bindusagar tank. The deities and servants of the temples are anointed with sandalwood paste to protect from heat. Dances, communal feasts and merrymaking are arranged by the people associated with the temple.
The Lingaraja temple is active in worship practises, unlike the other ancient temples of Bhubaneshwar which are not active worship centres. Non Hindus are not allowed inside the temple, but it can be viewed from the viewing platform located outside the temple. The viewing platform and the back of the temple can be reached via a lineway located to the right of the main entrance of the temple. Sanctity of the temple is maitained by disallowing dogs, unbathed visitors, menstruating women and families that encountered birth or death in the preceding 12 days. In case of a foreign tresspass, the temple follows a purification ritual and dumping of prasad (food offering) in a well.
RELIGIOUS PRACTICES
The image of Lingaraja is abluted with water (called mahasnana) several times a day and decorated with flowers, sandal paste and cloth. Hemlock or hemlock flowers which are generally offered in other Shiva temples is not allowed in the Lingaraja temple. Bilva leaves (Aegle marmelos) and tulasi (Ocimum sanctum) are used in daily worship. Offerings of cooked rice, curries and sweet-meats are displayed in the bhogamandapa (hall of offering) and the divinity is invoked to accept them amidst scores of chanting of Sanskrit texts. Coconut, ripe plantains and kora-khai are generally offered to Lingaraja by the pilgrims. Bhang beverage is offered to Lingaraja by some devotees especially on the day of Pana Sankranti (Oriya new year).
The Lingaraja temple is open from 6 a.m. to about 9 p.m. and is intermittently closed during bhoga (food offering) to the deity. During early morning, lamps in the cella are lit to awaken Lingaraja from his sleep, ablution is performed, followed by adoration and arati (waving of light). The temple is closed at about 12 p.m. until about 3.30 P.M. A ceremony known as Mahasnana (ablution) is performed once the doors are closed, followed by pouring of Panchamrita (a mixture of milk, curdled milk, clarified butter, honey and ghee) upon the deity for purification. At about 1 P.M., a ripe plantain is divided into two, one half is offered to Sun god and the other half to Dwarapala (the guarding deities in the doorway). Between 1.00 and 1.30 P.M. the food offering called Ballabha Bhoga (breakfast containing curdled milk, curd and vegetables) is offered to the deity. The consecrated food is carried to the temple of Parvati and placed before her as an offering, a practice commonly observed by the orthodox Hindu housewives. At about 2 P.M., the Sakala Dhupa (morning's offering of food) takes place. After the food is offered to Lingaraja, the offerings are carried to the temple of Parvati to serve her. An offering called Bhanda Dhupa is carried out at 3.30 P.M. at the hall of offering. This food is later offered by the inmates to the pilgrims as Mahaprasad.
A light refreshment known as Ballabha Dhupa is offered to the deity at around 4.30 P.M. At around 5 P.M., Dwipahar Dhupa (mid day meal) is offered. At around 7 P.M., another offering called Palia Badu is placed before the deity. Sandhya arati (waving of lights in the evening) is performed during that time. Another light meal called Sahana Dhupa is offered at around 8:30 P.M. After the meals, the ceremony of waving light (arati) is performed before the deity. At 9.30 P.M, the last service of the day, Bada Singara (the great decoration) is performed when the deity is decorated with flowers and ornaments after which a light food offering is made. A wooden palanquin is laid in the room, incense is lighted, drinking water is served and prepared betel is placed. Panchabaktra Mahadeva comes to the palanquin and returns to his own abode after the arati is performed. This is a bronze image of Mahadeva having five faces and Parvati in his lap. Each of these ceremonies is accompanied by ritual observances and recitations of mantras (Sanskrit texts) specified for each occasion.
TEMPLE STAFF & ADMINISTRATION
King Jajati Keshari, believed to be the founder of the Lingaraja temple, deputed Dravidian Brahmins as temple priests over the local Brahmins on account of their increased knowledge of Saivism. The focus was to enhance the temple practises from tribal rites to Sanskritic. While the exact number of castes involved in the nijogas (practises) is not known, Brahmins, tribal worshippers and inmates from Untouchable castes are believed to be part of the setup. Bose (1958) identified 41 services with the involvement of 22 separate castes and Mahaptra (1978) identified 30 services. It is understood from the records that kings and temple managers of different times introduced or discontinued certain services, fairs, offerings and caste-centred core services during their regime. As of 2012, the temple practised 36 different services (nijogas).
In modern times, the Lingaraja temple priests are from two communities, namely Brahman Nijog and Badu Nijog. The Badu are non-Brahmin servant groups, whose origin is not ascertained due to unavailability of authentic records, while they are described as Vadu in chapter 62 of the Ekamrapurana. The caste group of Badu is called Niyoga, which elects the officers every year during the Sandalwood festival. Every Badu undergoes three distinct rites, namely, ear-piercing, marriage and god-touching. Historically, the Badus performed five different temple duties - Paliabadu and Pharaka, which were considered important and Pochha, Pahada and Khataseja, which were considered inferior. From 1962, only Paliabadu and Pharaka practises are followed and the others are discontinued. The Badus also carry out ablution and dressing of the images of Siddhaganesh and Gopalini. The temple is maintained by the Temple Trust Board and the Archeological Survey of India (ASI). The temple is guarded by security personnel deputed by the Police Commissioner of Bhubaneswar and security guards appointed by the temple administration. The temple has an average of 6,000 visitors every day and receives lakhs of visitors during festivals. The Shivaratri festival during 2012 witnessed 200,000 visitors. As of 2011, the annual income of Lingaraja temple from hundis (donation boxes) is around INR1.2 million per annum. Another INR4 million is collected annually from other sources like rents from shops, cycle stands and agriculture lands. Starting 2011, the temple charges an amount for six types of religious worship (special pujas) carried out by the devotees.
WIKIPEDIA
Hosts and guests of the U.S. AFRICOM C4ISR Senior Leader Conference tour a winery in the hills above Vicenza, Italy, Feb. 3, 2011.
U.S. Army Africa photo by David Ruderman
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) hosted its second annual C4ISR Senior Leaders Conference Feb. 2-4 at Caserma Ederle, headquarters of U.S. Army Africa, in Vicenza, Italy.
The communications and intelligence community event, hosted by Brig. Gen. Robert Ferrell, AFRICOM C4 director, drew approximately 80 senior leaders from diverse U.S. military and government branches and agencies, as well as representatives of African nations and the African Union.
The conference is a combination of our U.S. AFRICOM C4 systems and intel directorate,” said Ferrell. “We come together annually to bring the team together to work on common goals to work on throughout the year. The team consists of our coalition partners as well as our inter-agency partners, as well as our components and U.S. AFRICOM staff.”
The conference focused on updates from participants, and on assessing the present state and goals of coalition partners in Africa, he said.
“The theme for our conference is ‘Delivering Capabilities to a Joint Information Environment,’ and we see it as a joint and combined team ... working together, side by side, to promote peace and stability there on the African continent,” Ferrell said.
Three goals of this year’s conference were to strengthen the team, assess priorities across the board, and get a better fix on the impact that the establishment of the U.S. Cyber Command will have on all members’ efforts in the future, he said.
“With the stand-up of U.S. Cyber Command, it brings a lot of unique challenges that we as a team need to talk through to ensure that our information is protected at all times,” Ferrell said.
African Union (AU) representatives from four broad geographic regions of Africa attended, which generated a holistic perspective on needs and requirements from across the continent, he said.
“We have members from the African Union headquarters that is located in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; we have members that are from Uganda; from Zambia; from Ghana; and also from the Congo. What are the gaps, what are the things that we kind of need to assist with as we move forward on our engagements on the African continent?” Ferrell said.
U.S. Army Africa Commander, Maj. Gen. David R. Hogg, welcomed participants as the conference got under way.
“We’re absolutely delighted to be the host for this conference, and we hope that this week you get a whole lot out of it,” said Hogg.
He took the opportunity to address the participants not only as their host, but from the perspective of a customer whose missions depend on the results of their efforts to support commanders in the field.
“When we’re talking about this group of folks that are here — from the joint side, from our African partners, from State, all those folks — it’s about partnership and interoperability. And every commander who’s ever had to fight in a combined environment understands that interoperability is the thing that absolutely slaps you upside the head,” Hogg said.
“We’re in the early stages of the process here of working with the African Union and the other partners, and you have an opportunity to design this from the end state, versus just building a bunch of ‘gunkulators.’ And so, the message is: think about what the end state is supposed to look like and construct the strategy to support the end state.
“Look at where we want to be at and design it that way,” Hogg said.
He also admonished participants to consider the second- and third-order effects of their choices in designing networks.
“With that said, over the next four days, I hope this conference works very well for you. If there’s anything we can do to make your stay better, please let us know,” Hogg said.
Over the following three days, participants engaged in a steady stream of briefings and presentations focused on systems, missions and updates from the field.
Col. Joseph W. Angyal, director of U.S. Army Africa G-6, gave an overview of operations and issues that focused on fundamentals, the emergence of regional accords as a way forward, and the evolution of a joint network enterprise that would serve all interested parties.
“What we’re trying to do is to work regionally. That’s frankly a challenge, but as we stand up the capability, really for the U.S. government, and work through that, we hope to become more regionally focused,” he said.
He referred to Africa Endeavor, an annual, multi-nation communications exercise, as a test bed for the current state of affairs on the continent, and an aid in itself to future development.
“In order to conduct those exercises, to conduct those security and cooperation events, and to meet contingency missions, we really, from the C4ISR perspective, have five big challenges,” Angyal said.
“You heard General Hogg this morning talk about ‘think about the customer’ — you’ve got to allow me to be able to get access to our data; I’ve got to be able to get to the data where and when I need it; you’ve got to be able to protect it; I have to be able to share it; and then finally, the systems have to be able to work together in order to build that coalition.
“One of the reasons General Ferrell is setting up this joint information enterprise, this joint network enterprise . . . it’s almost like trying to bring together disparate companies or corporations: everyone has their own system, they’ve paid for their own infrastructure, and they have their own policy, even though they support the same major company.
“Now multiply that when you bring in different services, multiply that when you bring in different U.S. government agencies, and then put a layer on top of that with the international partners, and there are lots of policies that are standing in our way.”
The main issue is not a question of technology, he said.
“The boxes are the same — a Cisco router is a Cisco router; Microsoft Exchange server is the same all over the world — but it’s the way that we employ them, and it’s the policies that we apply to it, that really stops us from interoperating, and that’s the challenge we hope to work through with the joint network enterprise.
“And I think that through things like Africa Endeavor and through the joint enterprise network, we’re looking at knocking down some of those policy walls, but at the end of the day they are ours to knock down. Bill Gates did not design a system to work only for the Army or for the Navy — it works for everyone,” Angyal said.
Brig. Gen. Joseph Searyoh, director general of Defense Information Communication Systems, General Headquarters, Ghana Armed Forces, agreed that coordinating policy is fundamental to improving communications with all its implications for a host of operations and missions.
“One would expect that in these modern times there is some kind of mutual engagement, and to build that engagement to be strong, there must be some kind of element of trust. … We have to build some kind of trust to be able to move forward,” said Searyoh.
“Some people may be living in silos of the past, but in the current engagement we need to tell people that we are there with no hidden agenda, no negative hidden agenda, but for the common good of all of us.
“We say that we are in the information age, and I’ve been saying something: that our response should not be optional, but it must be a must, because if you don’t join now, you are going to be left behind.
“So what do we do? We have to get our house in order.
“Why do I say so? We used to operate like this before the information age; now in the information age, how do we operate?
“So, we have to get our house in order and see whether we are aligning ourselves with way things should work now. So, our challenge is to come up with a strategy, see how best we can reorganize our structures, to be able to deliver communications-information systems support for the Ghana Armed Forces,” he said.
Searyoh related that his organization has already accomplished one part of erecting the necessary foundation by establishing an appropriate policy structure.
“What is required now is the implementing level. Currently we have communications on one side, and computers on one side. The lines are blurred — you cannot operate like that, you’ve got to bring them together,” he said.
Building that merged entity to support deployed forces is what he sees as the primary challenge at present.
“Once you get that done you can talk about equipment, you can talk about resources,” Searyoh said. “I look at the current collaboration between the U.S. and the coalition partners taking a new level.”
“The immediate challenges that we have is the interoperability, which I think is one of the things we are also discussing here, interoperability and integration,” said Lt. Col. Kelvin Silomba, African Union-Zambia, Information Technology expert for the Africa Stand-by Force.
“You know that we’ve got five regions in Africa. All these regions, we need to integrate them and bring them together, so the challenge of interoperability in terms of equipment, you know, different tactical equipment that we use, and also in terms of the language barrier — you know, all these regions in Africa you find that they speak different languages — so to bring them together we need to come up with one standard that will make everybody on board and make everybody able to talk to each other,” he said.
“So we have all these challenges. Other than that also, stemming from the background of these African countries, based on the colonization: some of them were French colonized, some of them were British colonized and so on, so you find that when they come up now we’ve adopted some of the procedures based on our former colonial masters, so that is another challenge that is coming on board.”
The partnership with brother African states, with the U.S. government and its military branches, and with other interested collaborators has had a positive influence, said Silomba.
“Oh, it’s great. From the time that I got engaged with U.S. AFRICOM — I started with Africa Endeavor, before I even came to the AU — it is my experience that it is something very, very good.
“I would encourage — I know that there are some member states — I would encourage that all those member states they come on board, all of these regional organizations, that they come on board and support the AFRICOM lead. It is something that is very, very good.
“As for example, the African Union has a lot of support that’s been coming in, technical as well as in terms of knowledge and equipment. So it’s great; it’s good and it’s great,” said Salimba.
Other participant responses to the conference were positive as well.
“The feedback I’ve gotten from every member is that they now know what the red carpet treatment looks like, because USARAF has gone over and above board to make sure the environment, the atmosphere and the actual engagements … are executed to perfection,” said Ferrell. “It’s been very good from a team-building aspect.
“We’ve had very good discussions from members of the African Union, who gave us a very good understanding of the operations that are taking place in the area of Somalia, the challenges with communications, and laid out the gaps and desires of where they see that the U.S. and other coalition partners can kind of improve the capacity there in that area of responsibility.
“We also talked about the AU, as they are expanding their reach to all of the five regions, of how can they have that interoperability and connectivity to each of the regions,” Ferrell said.
“(It’s been) a wealth of knowledge and experts that are here to share in terms of how we can move forward with building capacities and capabilities. Not only for U.S. interests, but more importantly from my perspective, in building capacities and capabilities for our African partners beginning with the Commission at the African Union itself,” said Kevin Warthon, U.S. State Department, peace and security adviser to the African Union.
“I think that General Ferrell has done an absolutely wonderful thing by inviting key African partners to participate in this event so they can share their personal experience from a national, regional and continental perspective,” he said.
Warthon related from his personal experience a vignette of African trust in Providence that he believed carries a pertinent metaphor and message to everyone attending the conference.
“We are not sure what we are going to do tomorrow, but the one thing that I am sure of is that we are able to do something. Don’t know when, don’t know how, but as long as our focus is on our ability to assist and to help to progress a people, that’s really what counts more than anything else,” he said.
“Don’t worry about the timetable; just focus on your ability to make a difference and that’s what that really is all about.
“I see venues such as this as opportunities to make what seems to be the impossible become possible. … This is what this kind of venue does for our African partners.
“We’re doing a wonderful job at building relationships, because that’s where it begins — we have to build relationships to establish trust. That’s why this is so important: building trust through relationships so that we can move forward in the future,” Warthon said.
Conference members took a cultural tour of Venice and visited a traditional winery in the hills above Vicenza before adjourning.
To learn more about U.S. Army Africa visit our official website at www.usaraf.army.mil
Official Twitter Feed: www.twitter.com/usarmyafrica
Official YouTube video channel: www.youtube.com/usarmyafrica
Manufactured by Kodak AG, Stuttgart, West Germany
Model: c.1959, Kodak catalogue no.035, (produced between 1959-61)
35mm film SLR camera
Lens: Rodenstock Retina-Ysarex 50mm f/2.8, Mount: special Deckel bayonet, interchangeable front component, filter: bayonet, serial no.4073877
Lens release: by a latch on the bottom of the lens-shutter barrel, press and turn the lens front part to counter clockwise
Aperture: f/1.9-f/22, non click stops, actual range depends on lens
setting: scale on the on the lens-shutter barrel, turn the small thumb wheel on the bottom of the on the lens-shutter barrel, a stop eliminates the risk of setting non-existing aperture values, when setting the aperture, the depth-of-field indicators (small red pins) on the lens-shutter barrel will move depending on the aperture you have dialed in.
Focusing: via ground glass screen or split image rangefinder in the viewfinder, front focusing ring and scale on the lens, w/ auto DOF red pointers
Focus range: 1-20m +inf
Shutter: Synchro-Compur SLR central leaf shutter, behind the lens unit,
speeds: 1-1/500 + B
setting: ring and dial on the lens-shutter barrel, w/ black handles for easy to use,
green numbers for auto-exposure and black numbers for manual eposure setting,
Shutter release: on the top plate, w/ cable release socket
Cocking lever: also winds the film, short stroke, on the bottom plate
Frame counter: window on the top plate, count-down type, manual reset, depress the small silver film release button beside the frame counter window and push the counter setting knob on the back of the top plate to right, repeat untill the mark between 1 and 36 figures is opposite the index notch.
Mirror: not instant return, returns when the shutter cocked
Viewfinder: SLR pentaprism, full size brilliant groun glass screen, with spit image rangefinder
Exposure meter: TTL (coupled), match-needle Selenium cell
Film speed range: ASA 8-3200, setting: dial on the right of the top plate, push the button on the film speed dial, then turn the small thumb wheel on the bottom of the on the lens-shutter barrel to desired ASA/DIN number
Exposure setting: shutter priority exposure, set the shutter speed, then the turn the small thumb wheel on the bottom of the the lens-shutter barrel to select the appropriate aperture, until the yellow pointer matchs with the needle in the meter window on the top plate.
**The meter reeds reflected light from the motive. To read incident light, a white plastic diffuser cover must be use.
Re-wind knob: on the left of the top plate, turns when winding
Re-wind release: small silver knob on the bottom plate
Film loading: as the usual way, when the counter reaches to 1, the winding lever automatically locks. If the counter setting is ignored before taking pictures the winding lever locks on 1, to keep on the shooting it must be un-lock: press the small silver film release button beside the frame counter window and simultaneously push the knob on the back of the top plate to right, like counter setting process.
Flash PC socket: on front of the camera, a green lever on the right of the lens-shutter barrel selects X and M sync, w/ V-X-M engravings, to move the lever press the small locking lever on the other side of the lens;
X setting: electronic flash at all speeds, M bulbs at 1/30; M setting: bulbs at all speeds
Cold-shoe
Memory dial: on the re-wind knob
Self-timer: set the green flash sync lever to V
Back cover: hinged; opening: turn the double safety lever's small arrow on the tripod socket plate, then press the small button visible under it
Engraving on back cover: Kodak Retina Camera
Tripod socket: 1/4''
Strap lugs
Body: metallic, Weight: 800g
serial no.62356
**The small thumb wheel on the bottom of the on the lens-shutter barrel
also doubles as a standoff camera support as well.
Reflex S is a major redesign of the original Retina Reflex. Retina Reflex S offered with various lenses. Schneider and Rodenstock made 28mm to 200mm lenses. Kodak Retina IIIc lenses are competible with Kodak Reflex S. The reverse is partially possible.
These cameras are expensive to repair, and most repairmen are reluctant to touch them.
The Retina Reflex S originally sold for $235 USD, (app. $1670 USD in 2007).
more info: Camerapedia,
Kodak Classics by Mischa Koning, Photoethnography by Karen Nakamura
U.S. Army Africa photo by Sgt. 1st Class Kyle Davis
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) hosted its second annual C4ISR Senior Leaders Conference Feb. 2-4 at Caserma Ederle, headquarters of U.S. Army Africa, in Vicenza, Italy.
The communications and intelligence community event, hosted by Brig. Gen. Robert Ferrell, AFRICOM C4 director, drew approximately 80 senior leaders from diverse U.S. military and government branches and agencies, as well as representatives of African nations and the African Union.
“The conference is a combination of our U.S. AFRICOM C4 systems and intel directorate,” said Ferrell. “We come together annually to bring the team together to work on common goals to work on throughout the year. The team consists of our coalition partners as well as our inter-agency partners, as well as our components and U.S. AFRICOM staff.”
The conference focused on updates from participants, and on assessing the present state and goals of coalition partners in Africa, he said.
“The theme for our conference is ‘Delivering Capabilities to a Joint Information Environment,’ and we see it as a joint and combined team ... working together, side by side, to promote peace and stability there on the African continent,” Ferrell said.
Three goals of this year’s conference were to strengthen the team, assess priorities across the board, and get a better fix on the impact that the establishment of the U.S. Cyber Command will have on all members’ efforts in the future, he said.
“With the stand-up of U.S. Cyber Command, it brings a lot of unique challenges that we as a team need to talk through to ensure that our information is protected at all times,” Ferrell said.
African Union (AU) representatives from four broad geographic regions of Africa attended, which generated a holistic perspective on needs and requirements from across the continent, he said.
“We have members from the African Union headquarters that is located in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; we have members that are from Uganda; from Zambia; from Ghana; and also from the Congo. What are the gaps, what are the things that we kind of need to assist with as we move forward on our engagements on the African continent?” Ferrell said.
U.S. Army Africa Commander, Maj. Gen. David R. Hogg, welcomed participants as the conference got under way.
“We’re absolutely delighted to be the host for this conference, and we hope that this week you get a whole lot out of it,” said Hogg.
He took the opportunity to address the participants not only as their host, but from the perspective of a customer whose missions depend on the results of their efforts to support commanders in the field.
“When we’re talking about this group of folks that are here — from the joint side, from our African partners, from State, all those folks — it’s about partnership and interoperability. And every commander who’s ever had to fight in a combined environment understands that interoperability is the thing that absolutely slaps you upside the head,” Hogg said.
“We’re in the early stages of the process here of working with the African Union and the other partners, and you have an opportunity to design this from the end state, versus just building a bunch of ‘gunkulators.’ And so, the message is: think about what the end state is supposed to look like and construct the strategy to support the end state.
“Look at where we want to be at and design it that way,” Hogg said.
He also admonished participants to consider the second- and third-order effects of their choices in designing networks.
“With that said, over the next four days, I hope this conference works very well for you. If there’s anything we can do to make your stay better, please let us know,” Hogg said.
Over the following three days, participants engaged in a steady stream of briefings and presentations focused on systems, missions and updates from the field.
Col. Joseph W. Angyal, director of U.S. Army Africa G-6, gave an overview of operations and issues that focused on fundamentals, the emergence of regional accords as a way forward, and the evolution of a joint network enterprise that would serve all interested parties.
“What we’re trying to do is to work regionally. That’s frankly a challenge, but as we stand up the capability, really for the U.S. government, and work through that, we hope to become more regionally focused,” he said.
He referred to Africa Endeavor, an annual, multi-nation communications exercise, as a test bed for the current state of affairs on the continent, and an aid in itself to future development.
“In order to conduct those exercises, to conduct those security and cooperation events, and to meet contingency missions, we really, from the C4ISR perspective, have five big challenges,” Angyal said.
“You heard General Hogg this morning talk about ‘think about the customer’ — you’ve got to allow me to be able to get access to our data; I’ve got to be able to get to the data where and when I need it; you’ve got to be able to protect it; I have to be able to share it; and then finally, the systems have to be able to work together in order to build that coalition.
“One of the reasons General Ferrell is setting up this joint information enterprise, this joint network enterprise . . . it’s almost like trying to bring together disparate companies or corporations: everyone has their own system, they’ve paid for their own infrastructure, and they have their own policy, even though they support the same major company.
“Now multiply that when you bring in different services, multiply that when you bring in different U.S. government agencies, and then put a layer on top of that with the international partners, and there are lots of policies that are standing in our way.”
The main issue is not a question of technology, he said.
“The boxes are the same — a Cisco router is a Cisco router; Microsoft Exchange server is the same all over the world — but it’s the way that we employ them, and it’s the policies that we apply to it, that really stops us from interoperating, and that’s the challenge we hope to work through with the joint network enterprise.
“And I think that through things like Africa Endeavor and through the joint enterprise network, we’re looking at knocking down some of those policy walls, but at the end of the day they are ours to knock down. Bill Gates did not design a system to work only for the Army or for the Navy — it works for everyone,” Angyal said.
Brig. Gen. Joseph Searyoh, director general of Defense Information Communication Systems, General Headquarters, Ghana Armed Forces, agreed that coordinating policy is fundamental to improving communications with all its implications for a host of operations and missions.
“One would expect that in these modern times there is some kind of mutual engagement, and to build that engagement to be strong, there must be some kind of element of trust. … We have to build some kind of trust to be able to move forward,” said Searyoh.
“Some people may be living in silos of the past, but in the current engagement we need to tell people that we are there with no hidden agenda, no negative hidden agenda, but for the common good of all of us.
“We say that we are in the information age, and I’ve been saying something: that our response should not be optional, but it must be a must, because if you don’t join now, you are going to be left behind.
“So what do we do? We have to get our house in order.
“Why do I say so? We used to operate like this before the information age; now in the information age, how do we operate?
“So, we have to get our house in order and see whether we are aligning ourselves with way things should work now. So, our challenge is to come up with a strategy, see how best we can reorganize our structures, to be able to deliver communications-information systems support for the Ghana Armed Forces,” he said.
Searyoh related that his organization has already accomplished one part of erecting the necessary foundation by establishing an appropriate policy structure.
“What is required now is the implementing level. Currently we have communications on one side, and computers on one side. The lines are blurred — you cannot operate like that, you’ve got to bring them together,” he said.
Building that merged entity to support deployed forces is what he sees as the primary challenge at present.
“Once you get that done you can talk about equipment, you can talk about resources,” Searyoh said. “I look at the current collaboration between the U.S. and the coalition partners taking a new level.”
“The immediate challenges that we have is the interoperability, which I think is one of the things we are also discussing here, interoperability and integration,” said Lt. Col. Kelvin Silomba, African Union-Zambia, Information Technology expert for the Africa Stand-by Force.
“You know that we’ve got five regions in Africa. All these regions, we need to integrate them and bring them together, so the challenge of interoperability in terms of equipment, you know, different tactical equipment that we use, and also in terms of the language barrier — you know, all these regions in Africa you find that they speak different languages — so to bring them together we need to come up with one standard that will make everybody on board and make everybody able to talk to each other,” he said.
“So we have all these challenges. Other than that also, stemming from the background of these African countries, based on the colonization: some of them were French colonized, some of them were British colonized and so on, so you find that when they come up now we’ve adopted some of the procedures based on our former colonial masters, so that is another challenge that is coming on board.”
The partnership with brother African states, with the U.S. government and its military branches, and with other interested collaborators has had a positive influence, said Silomba.
“Oh, it’s great. From the time that I got engaged with U.S. AFRICOM — I started with Africa Endeavor, before I even came to the AU — it is my experience that it is something very, very good.
“I would encourage — I know that there are some member states — I would encourage that all those member states they come on board, all of these regional organizations, that they come on board and support the AFRICOM lead. It is something that is very, very good.
“As for example, the African Union has a lot of support that’s been coming in, technical as well as in terms of knowledge and equipment. So it’s great; it’s good and it’s great,” said Salimba.
Other participant responses to the conference were positive as well.
“The feedback I’ve gotten from every member is that they now know what the red carpet treatment looks like, because USARAF has gone over and above board to make sure the environment, the atmosphere and the actual engagements … are executed to perfection,” said Ferrell. “It’s been very good from a team-building aspect.
“We’ve had very good discussions from members of the African Union, who gave us a very good understanding of the operations that are taking place in the area of Somalia, the challenges with communications, and laid out the gaps and desires of where they see that the U.S. and other coalition partners can kind of improve the capacity there in that area of responsibility.
“We also talked about the AU, as they are expanding their reach to all of the five regions, of how can they have that interoperability and connectivity to each of the regions,” Ferrell said.
“(It’s been) a wealth of knowledge and experts that are here to share in terms of how we can move forward with building capacities and capabilities. Not only for U.S. interests, but more importantly from my perspective, in building capacities and capabilities for our African partners beginning with the Commission at the African Union itself,” said Kevin Warthon, U.S. State Department, peace and security adviser to the African Union.
“I think that General Ferrell has done an absolutely wonderful thing by inviting key African partners to participate in this event so they can share their personal experience from a national, regional and continental perspective,” he said.
Warthon related from his personal experience a vignette of African trust in Providence that he believed carries a pertinent metaphor and message to everyone attending the conference.
“We are not sure what we are going to do tomorrow, but the one thing that I am sure of is that we are able to do something. Don’t know when, don’t know how, but as long as our focus is on our ability to assist and to help to progress a people, that’s really what counts more than anything else,” he said.
“Don’t worry about the timetable; just focus on your ability to make a difference and that’s what that really is all about.
“I see venues such as this as opportunities to make what seems to be the impossible become possible. … This is what this kind of venue does for our African partners.
“We’re doing a wonderful job at building relationships, because that’s where it begins — we have to build relationships to establish trust. That’s why this is so important: building trust through relationships so that we can move forward in the future,” Warthon said.
Conference members took a cultural tour of Venice and visited a traditional winery in the hills above Vicenza before adjourning.
To learn more about U.S. Army Africa visit our official website at www.usaraf.army.mil
Official Twitter Feed: www.twitter.com/usarmyafrica
Official YouTube video channel: www.youtube.com/usarmyafrica
Here's a closeup of the mechanism that allows an old-style ball mouse to detect your hand movements. There's a light beam running between the transparent square (an LED-style light emitter) and the black square (a photocell/light detector). As you move your hand, the mouse ball moves too. It pushes against a roller that turns the spoked wheel, breaking the light beam repeatedly. Counting the number of times the beam is broken gives a precise measurement of how far your hand has moved.
This photo is from our article on how computer mice work.
For a bit more context, see the photo of the same mouse taken from overhead.
Our images are published under a Creative Commons Licence (see opposite) and are free for noncommercial use. We also license our images for commercial use. Please contact us directly via our website for more details.
One huge monster cloud came through from the north. Nothing but the cloud slowly passing through. That eerie light put me on rainbow alert. Then it started blowing, then raining in the sunshine. I got in my car and sure enough a rainbow started growing. I drove to a better vantage point and said OMG, a hundred times.
Deck 1, Deck 2, Deck 3, the bridge, conference room, mess hall, and engineering are all removable and fit inside the ship
Copyright © 2025 by Craig Paup. All rights reserved.
Any use, printed or digital, in whole or edited, requires my written permission.
components are:
light aluminum hood of a wok
convex mirror (death corner for trucks)
plastic food container
SB800 flash
Reference: DS.GP.1919/5255
This photograph shows the major components of the Satellite Tiros III, built by Grubb Parsons in Newcastle upon Tyne at some point in the mid 20th century.
This photograph is taken from the Grubb Parsons Ltd collection at Tyne & Wear Archives. The records of Grubb Parsons Ltd, Newcastle upon Tyne, England, consist of 65 linear metres (213 linear feet) of files, plans, photographs and glass plate negatives relating to this internationally renowned firm's manufacture of precision telescopic instruments.
The original Business was founded in the early nineteenth century by Thomas Grubb, in 1925 the company was acquired by Sir Charles Parsons and continued to manufacture Telescopic and Astronomical instruments until 1985.
This Glass Lantern Slide is taken from a large collection that documents the work of Grubb Parsons Ltd at their workshop in Walkergate, Newcastle upon Tyne. It was here that Grubb Parsons Ltd manufactured Telescopic and Astronomical equipment for companies and observatories world wide. Their equipment was designed and built for use and research across the Globe, to name only a few of these locations Grubb Parsons Ltd supplied to the UK, Switzerland, Denmark, Egypt, South Africa, Greece, Australia, Japan, India, Hawaii, Poland, Chile, Canada, France and Spain.
(Copyright) We're happy for you to share these digital images within the spirit of The Commons. Please cite 'Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums' when reusing. Certain restrictions on high quality reproductions and commercial use of the original physical version apply though; if you're unsure please email archives@twmuseums.org.uk
PictionID:44025874 - Title:Atlas Component - Catalog:14_009129 - Filename:14_009129.TIF - - - - - Image from the Convair/General Dynamics Astronautics Atlas Negative Collection---Please Tag these images so that the information can be permanently stored with the digital file.---Repository: San Diego Air and Space Museum
U.S. Army Africa opened a weeklong Theater Army Security Cooperation Conference Aug. 23 in Vicenza, Italy.
Representatives from U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), Army Africa, and an array of Army commands and programs gathered for presentations by and discussions with embassy and country team personnel to coordinate Theater Security Cooperation activities over the next three years. Approximately 120 people in all are participating, said Lt. Col. Ronald Miller, acting director of Army Africa’s Security Cooperation Directorate.
U.S. Army Africa Commander, Maj. Gen. David R. Hogg, addressed the opening session with a video message to attendees. “Thank you all for traveling long distances to be with us in Vicenza, Italy,” said Hogg, who went on to articulate four basic goals for the conference.
“It gives us the opportunity for you all to educate each and every one of us on what you do, what your mission and what your country team agendas and goals are, and what the ambassador’s goals are, for each respective country.”
In a reciprocal manner, the conference allows a range of American personnel working throughout Africa to understand the role of U.S. Army Africa as an Army Service Component Command.
“You need to understand what our capabilities are and what our mission sets are,” Hogg said.
He urged conference attendees to see those two elements in perspective. “To understand the institutional Army, how we interact with our higher headquarters, the Big Army: what resources we are able to bring into play, and develop those fundamental relationships that are vital for each of us to accomplish our mission,” Hogg said.
The final conference goal is to lock in the fiscal year 2011 TSC plan in preparation for the annual AFRICOM-level TSC conference to be held in November.
The first two days of the conference were dedicated to a presentation of Army Africa TSC planning and country team briefs that focused on the possibilities, issues, agendas and goals of U.S. engagement with specific countries.
“We are so organized because of what’s going on inside . . . the sausage-making.”
“Mad-minute presentations,” in which attendees had 60 seconds or so to present their organizations and missions to the conference, were both effective and popular, allowing participants to identify each other for follow-up conversations throughout the event, said Mark Devlin, SCD deputy director.
These quick presentations worked like speed dating, Devlin said.
Regional breakout sessions, to consider the five main geographical regions of Africa, were scheduled for the third and fourth days. Maj. Gen. Hogg was expected to join attendees on the fourth day and be outbriefed by Army Africa SCD officials on Friday, Miller said.
“Each country rep was able to give about a 10-minute blurb about what is going on in their countries. It’s great for idea sharing,” Devlin said.
“I was at last year’s conference, and it’s really productive,” said Sara Young, AFRICOM military-to-military program manager for East Africa. “It lays a good groundwork for what we do in November.”
“It’s good for all our people on the embassy country teams,” said Andy Tarr, Army Africa’s G-5 chief of the policy and strategy division. “They’re usually one or two guys, so they get to meet these people, get an idea what tools they bring to bear. It’s good that they can link up.
“We have representatives from AFRICOM, and components of AFRICOM. Another big constituency we’ve got here is Department of the Army. We have people from Training and Doctrine Command, from the Corps of Engineers, from Medical Command. All these guys represent organizations that have security cooperation programs of their own, or they have capabilities that are valuable for cooperation in Africa. They want to make sure what they’re doing is in support of Army Africa and AFRICOM strategies and objectives,” he said.
“We’re doing a mind meld,” Devlin said. “We’ve got the same skills sets. We now made the face-to-face contacts. Now, all of a sudden, they’re colleagues, not a name on an email. And it all works.”
To learn more about U.S. Army Africa visit our official website at www.usaraf.army.mil
Official Twitter Feed: www.twitter.com/usarmyafrica
Official YouTube video channel: www.youtube.com/usarmyafrica
Huge space in the space frame, possibilty for a a double interwoven structure. I need more paper though
next step
visual complexity X structural simplicity
Highly recommended component isolation system. Used in conjunction with one another, my system has experienced a profoundly noticeable drop in the noise floor, with corresponding improvements in bass, midrange and treble. IMHO they help get you closer to the music by letting your components perform free of vibration and unwanted resonance.
Here is a completed set of wine charms. Dig the "licorice allsorts" style capacitor on the lower right!
This is part of a DIY "solder your own wine charms" project; read more about it here.
This waterproof tablet is serious about entertainment. Hear every beat thanks to Hi-res audio, noise canceling technology and front stereo speakers. See every shade on the 8” (20.3 cm) screen bursting with Sony’s display technology. With an impressive rating, you won't ever have to worry about water or dust getting in the way of performance. This super-light, super-slim tablet is a true feat of engineering - crafted from the highest-quality materials with clean lines and a rounded aluminum frame.
Launched: 2014 November
Chipset: Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 (Quad-core 2,5 GHz)
Memory: 3 GB RAM, 16 GB internal storage, micro SDXC slot
Screen: 8-inch TFT LCD, 1200x1920, 283 dpi
Dimensions: 213.4 x 123.6 x 6.4 mm
Weight: 270 g
Photo: Thomas Ohlsson Photography
www.thomasohlsson.com | 500px | Facebook | Flickr | Instagram
My personal bikes are always a testing ground for me, not only for parts but also frame tubing, forks, and frame building components.
This bike has modern carbon bars, seat post, which I have not ridden before, and a modern 1.0 Enve fork, so I wanted to see how they felt compared to the aluminum bars/post and steel (fork) that I have been riding recently.
The frame is also much stiffer than my traditional road bike with a 35 mm double oversized down tube and custom-tapered 28.6-31.7 mm seat and top tube. This allows for a standard 27.2 seat post, which is more common and comfortable than the odd 30.6 post the 31.7 seat tube requires. I have several custom tapered top tubes that are made by Reynolds with different wall thicknesses and butt lengths and opted for a thin-walled shorter-butt tube that gives me the lively ride I enjoy from a steel frame and that is always important for me to capture in the frames I design.
I have used the full uber/double oversized sets for larger riders and have given them test rides around the block and have found them to be a little too stiff for my taste
I used KVA stainless 22.2 round oval round chain stays, which I have on my track bike and are nice and stiff. I prefer the 22.2 mm chain stays for most builds over the 30-17 mm stays. I find them to have better lateral stiffness for power transfer while giving you more vertical compliance for comfort.
The seat stays are Dedacciai Zero Replica which I have been using for years; they bulge out to 18 mm but have a long 14 mm taper at the seat cluster, which gives them a good balance of stiffness and compliance that I look for in a seat stay.
I had been kicking around the idea of integrating a headset into the head lugs of a modern 1 1/8" frame for some time but was not sure how it would turn out. The OD of the lug and ID of a Columbus integrated cup were close but required some modification to get right. While it does not quite have the elegance of the 1949 Bianchi's that had integrated headsets, it has grown on me and has a clean transition to the carbon fork.
Multi-Component Inspector Kit (MCIK) for Complementary Access (CA)/DIV Inspections
Safeguard Equipments - Extended Multi-Component Inspector Kit (MCIK) packed in soft bags inside plastic PeliCase IAEA Vienna, Austria, 3 October 2018
Photo Credit: Dean Calma / IAEA
An example of subway signaling components that were damaged as a result of flooding during Hurricane Sandy.
Photo taken at the 207th Street Yard in Upper Manhattan. Please credit: Metropolitan Transportation Authority / Deirdre Parker.
Circulación: Circulación TR 2 Ocaña - Base de Montaje de AV de Villarrubia de Santiago (CGD) (cont. MTR 91189 Vicálvaro-Mercancías - Ocaña)
Noblejas, 18.2.22
The text reads:
'LICENSED ONLY FOR
GOVERNMENTAL AND NOT
FOR COMMERCIAL USES
NOT FOR TOLL AND
NOT FOR RESALE
SEPT 15 1942