View allAll Photos Tagged control
Dial controls of the macro twin flash.
Details:
www.nickybay.com/2017/06/olympus-stf-8-macro-twin-flash-r...
The jewelwing damselflies were staying close by me in the woods which seemed a bit strange until I saw what they were eating - it was mosquitos. I was the lure.
So all the massive mosquito control programs failed to stop the mosquitos. But grasshoppers and many other insects now are scarce!
Thanks everyone for all the comments I've been getting. It's really such a pleasure for me to see everyone's photos - they have provided such inspiration. And it's really been invaluable to get Id's and corrections on mine.
Parte de los controles de la E-3015, en ese momento se encontraba haciendo maniobras nocturnas en los patios de El Arenal: sacando AEL´s del andén principal, para después dejar en posición al "1000" que saldría esa noche con equipo AEZ. 30 de junio de 2005.
The Battery box Trick DOES work
I have just tested it.
This gives a total LEGO solution to running 9-volt train with Power Functions Control
Parts required
1 x 9 Volt Train Controller 2868
1 x 9 volt Train Transformer 9833
1 x 9 Volt to Power Functions adapter cable 8886
1 x Power Function Standard Battery Box (NO BATTERYS INSTALLED) 8881
1 X Power Functions IR Receiver 8884
2 x 9 Volt to Power Functions adapter cables 8886
2 x 9 Volt Track Power Cables 5306
1 x Power Functions Variable IR Controller 8879
Procedure for setting up and using the 100% LEGO solution for getting Power Function performance and control with 9-volt trains.
1 Connect the 9-volt Train Transformer 9833 to the 9-Volt Train Controller 2868.
2 Power it On the Green Led should light up on the 9-Volt Train Controller 2868.
3 Turn the speed dial of the 9-Volt Train Controller 2868 to full.
4 Connect the 9-volt end of the 9-Volt to Power Functions adapter cable 8886 to the 9 Volt Train Controller 2868.
5 Connect the Power Functions end of the 9-Volt to Power Functions adapter cable 8886 to the Power Function Standard Battery Box (NO BATTERYS INSTALLED) 8881.
6 Slide the Power Switch of the Power Function Standard Battery Box(NO BATTERYS INSTALLED) 8881 until the Green Led on the Power Function Standard Battery Box (NO BATTERYS INSTALLED) 8881 Lights up.
7 Connect the Power Functions IR Receiver 8884 to the Power Function Standard Battery Box (NO BATTERYS INSTALLED) 8881 The Green Led on the Power Functions IR Receiver 8884 should light up.
8 Connect the Power Function ends of the two 9 Volt to Power Functions adapter cables 8886 to the Power Functions IR Receiver 8884.
9 Connect the 9-Volt ends of the 9-Volt to Power Functions adapter cables 8886 to the two 9 Volt Track Power Cables 5306.
10 Connect the two 9-Volt Track Power Cables 5306 to two lengths of 9 Volt track.
11 With the Power Functions Variable IR Controller 8879 You should now be able to take advantage of using Power Functions Control to control your 9-Volt Trains.
A photo of a generic pest control trailer outside of a house.
Want to use one of our images on your own site? That's great! We do ask that you please give credit for the image by including a link to www.insightpest.com/.
I have the autumn in palm of my hand. I feel the taste of grapes and nuts. The colors have changed into red, yellow and orange, and that make's me dream again and again. ( I miss those days... )
_________________________________
© 2010 Elisa Ursalas. All rights reserved.
The Homewood Izaak Walton Preserve in Homewood, Illinois has been conducting controlled burns for many years. These burns help eliminate non-native vegetation and promote healthy prairie and wooded areas for all to enjoy, including the wildlife that lives in our preserve.
Own This Print on Pixels.com (Fine Art America)
pixels.com/featured/controlled-burn-in-the-preserve-frank...
License this Image on LicensingPixels (FineArtAmerica)
licensingpixels.com/featured/controlled-burn-in-the-prese...
De Immigrant is an authentic Dutch windmill built in the Netherlands specifically for the city of Fulton. It sets on a berm along the flood control dike for the Mississippi River. Fulton's Dutch windmill is a "beltmolen." In Dutch, "belt" means mound of dirt and "molen" means mill. De Immigrant, like most beltmolens, has an entrance at ground level. Fulton's Wellcome center is housed there.
This windmill was designed, manufactured, and partially assembled in the Netherlands then disassambled, and transported to Fulton via ship, rail, and truck. Two craftsmen from the Netherlands journeyed to Fulton to reassemble the mill, the job lasted nearly 10 months. The bricks were salvaged from a building in the Netherlands that was 120 years old. The brick at the base of the mill are from a Dutch building that was 150 years old.
The 35 foot tall base is constructed of solid wooden beams made from bilinga wood, a heavy, dence,durabls wood from Africa. Eight bilinga beams, each weighing one ton, provide the octagon shaped framework for the mill The framework is secured with wooden pegs. The base unit alone weighs fifty tons.
The 25 ton cap sits on top of the octagon base; it contains the sails, the shaft for the sails, the brake wheel and the brake. The break wheel is located in the cap and has many large wooden cogs (teeth). As the wind moves the sails, the brake wheel rotates causing the the other interior shafts and gears to move. Sheep fat is used to lubricate the wooden beams on which the cap turns while beeswax is used to lubricate the brake wheel cogs.
The 90 foot tall windmill is a fully operational mill. The entire cap can turn and the sails operate by wind power. Though fund raising efforts, grinding stones were added and officially dedicated on May5, 2001.
The grinding stones are 55 inches in diameter. The bed and runner stones weight 2000 pounds and 2650 pounds respectively. They are made of blue basalt, a hard. volcanic rock, quarried in Germany.
For more info chamber@cityoffulton.us or
+++ 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:
After World War I, the German aircraft industry had several problems. German airlines were forbidden to operate multi engine aircraft and during a period all manufacturing of aircraft in Germany was banned. By 1921, some of the restrictions was lifted, civilian aircraft could be made after approval of an international control commission if they fulfilled certain requirements. To bypass these rules and to be able to make whatever aircraft they wanted several aircraft manufacturers moved abroad. In 1921, Carl Bücker handled the purchase of a reconnaissance aircraft from Caspar-Werke in Travemünde. Because they expected problems due to the rules in the peace treaty regarding the export of German fighter aircraft, Bücker explored the possibility to smuggle the parts out of Germany and assemble the aircraft in Sweden.
To make the purchase easier, Ernst Heinkel and Bücker started Svenska Aero in Lidingö in 1921. The contract on the aircraft was transferred from Caspar to Svenska Aero. Heinkel and some German assembly workers temporarily moved to Lidingö to assemble the aircraft. During 1922 to 1923, the company moved into a former shipyard in Skärsätra on Lidingö since the company had received additional orders from the navy's air force. The parts for those aircraft were made in Sweden by Svenska Aero but assembled by TDS. In 1928, the navy ordered four J 4 (Heinkel HD 19) as a fighter with pontoons. That delivery came to be the last licens- built aircraft by Svenska Aero. In the mid-1920s, Svenska Aero created their own design department to be able to make their own aircraft models. Sven Blomberg, earlier employed by Heinkel Flugzeugwerke, was hired as head of design. In 1930, he was joined by Anders Johan Andersson from Messerschmitt. Despite that, Svenska Aero designed and made several different models on their own.
One of them was the model SA-16, a direct response to the Swedish Air Force and Navy’s interest in the new dive bomber tactics, which had become popular in Germany since the mid-Thirties and had spawned several specialized aircraft, the Junkers Ju 87 being the best-known type. The Flygvapnet (Swedish Air Force) had already conducted dive bombing trials with Hawker Hart (B 4) biplanes, but only with mixed results. Diving towards the target simplified the bomb's trajectory and allowed the pilot to keep visual contact throughout the bomb run. This allowed attacks on point targets and ships, which were difficult to attack with conventional level bombers, even en masse. While accuracy was increased through bombing runs at almost vertical dive, the aircraft were not suited for this kind of operations – structurally, and through the way the bombs were dropped.
Therefore, Svenska Aero was tasked to develop an indigenous dedicated dive bomber, primarily intended to attack ships, and with a secondary role as reconnaissance aircraft – a mission profile quite similar to American ship-based “SB” aircraft of the time. Having learnt from the tests with the Hawker Harts, the SA-16 was a very robust monoplane, resulting in an almost archaic look. It was a single-engine all-metal cantilever monoplane with a fixed undercarriage and carried a two-person crew. The main construction material was duralumin, and the external coverings were made of duralumin sheeting, bolts and parts that were required to take heavy stress were made of steel. The wings were of so-called “double-wing” construction, which gave the SA-16 considerable advantage on take-off; even at a shallow angle, large lift forces were created through the airfoil, reducing take-off and landing runs. Retractable perforated air brakes were mounted under the wings’ leading edges. The fully closed “greenhouse cabin” offered space for a crew of two in tandem, with the pilot in front and a navigator/radio operator/observer/gunner behind. To provide the rear-facing machine gun with an increased field of fire, the stabilizers were of limited span but deeper to compensate for the loss of surface, what resulted in unusual proportions. As a side benefit, the short stabilizers had, compared with a wider standard layout, increased structural integrity. Power came from an air-cooled Bristol Mercury XII nine-cylinder radial engine with 880 hp (660 kW), built by Nohab in Sweden.
Internal armament consisted of two fixed forward-firing 8 mm (0.315 in) Flygplanskulspruta Ksp m/22F (M1919 Browning AN/M2) machine guns in the wings outside of the propeller disc. A third machine gun of the same type was available in the rear cockpit on a flexible mount as defensive weapon. A total of 700 kg (1,500 lb) of bombs could be carried externally. On the fuselage centerline, a swing arm could hold bombs of up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) caliber and deploy them outside of the propeller arc when released in a, additional racks under the outer wings could hold bombs of up to 250 kg (550 lb) caliber each or clusters of smaller bombs, e. g. four 50 (110 lb) or six 12 kg (26 ½ lb) bombs.
Flight testing of the first SA-16 prototype began on 14 August 1936. The aircraft could take off in 250 m (820 ft) and climb to 1,875 m (6,152 ft) in eight minutes with a 250 kg (550 lb) bomb load, and its cruising speed was 250 km/h (160 mph). This was less than expected, and pilots also complained that navigation and powerplant instruments were cluttered and not easy to read, especially in combat. To withstand strong forces during a dive, heavy plating, along with brackets riveted to the frame and longeron, was added to the fuselage. Despite this, pilots praised the aircraft's handling qualities and strong airframe. These problems were quickly resolved, but subsequent testing and progress still fell short of the designers’ hopes. With some refinements the machine's speed was increased to 274 km/h (170 mph) at ground level and 319 km/h 319 km/h (198 mph, 172 kn) at 3,650 m (11,980 ft), while maintaining its good handling ability.
Since the Swedish Air Force was in dire need for a dive bomber, the SA-16 was accepted into service as the B 9 – even though it was clear that it was only a stopgap solution on the way to a more capable light bomber with dive attack capabilities. This eventually became the Saab 17, which was initiated in 1938 as a request from the Flygvapnet to replace its fleet of dive bombers of American origin, the B 5 (Northrop A-17), the B 6 (Seversky A8V1) and the obsolete Fokker S 6 (C.Ve) sesquiplane, after the deal with Fokker to procure the two-engine twin-boom G.I as a standardized type failed due to the German invasion of the Netherlands. The B 9 dive bomber would subsequently be replaced by the more modern and capable B 17 in the long run, too, which made its first flight on 18 May 1940 and was introduced to frontline units in March 1942. Until then, 93 SA-16s had been produced between 1937 and 1939. When the B 17 became available, the slow B 9 was quickly retired from the attack role. Plans to upgrade the aircraft with a stronger 14 cylinder engine (a Piaggio P.XIbis R.C.40D with 790 kW/1,060 hp) were not carried out, as it was felt that the design lacked further development potential in an offensive role.
Because the airframes were still young and had a lot of service life ahead of them, most SA-16s were from 1941 on relegated to patrol and reconnaissance missions along the Swedish coastlines, observing ship and aircraft traffic in the Baltic Sea and undertaking rescue missions with droppable life rafts. For long-range missions, the forked ventral swing arm was replaced with a fixed plumbed pylon for an external 682 liters (150 Imp. gal.) auxiliary tank that more than doubled the aircraft’s internal fuel capacity of 582 liters, giving it an endurance of around 8 hours. In many cases, the machine guns on these aircraft were removed to save weight. In this configuration the SA-16 was re-designated S 9 (“S” for Spaning) and the machines served in their naval observation and SAR role well into the Fifties, when the last SA-16s were retired.
General characteristics:
Crew: two, pilot and observer
Length: 9,58 m (31 ft 11 in)
Wingspan: 10,67 m (34 ft 11 in)
Height: 3,82 m (12 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 30.2 m² (325 sq ft)
Empty weight: 2,905 kg (6,404 lb)
Gross weight: 4,245 kg (9,359 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 4,853 kg (10,700 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Bristol Mercury XII nine-cylinder radial engine with 880 hp (660 kW),
driving a three-bladed variable pitch metal propeller
u>Performance:
Maximum speed: 319 km/h (198 mph, 172 kn) at 3,650 m (11,980 ft)
274 km/h (170 mph; 148 kn) at sea level
299 km/h (186 mph; 161 kn) at 2,000 m (6,600 ft)
308 km/h (191 mph; 166 kn) at 5,000 m (16,000 ft)
Stall speed: 110 km/h (68 mph, 59 kn)
Range: 1,260 km (780 mi, 680 nmi)
Service ceiling: 7,300 m (24,000 ft)
Time to altitude: 2,000 m (6,600 ft) in 4 minutes 45 seconds
4,000 m (13,000 ft) in 15 minutes 10 seconds
Armament:
2× fixed 8 mm (0.315 in) Flygplanskulspruta Ksp m/22F (M1919 Browning AN/M2) machine guns
in the wings outside of the propeller disc (with 600 RPG), plus
1× 8 mm (0.315 in) Ksp m/22F machine gun on a flexible mount in the rear cockpit with 800 rounds
Ventral and underwing hardpoints for a total external bomb load of 700 kg (1,500 lb)
The kit and its assembly:
This purely fictional Swedish dive bomber was inspired by reading about Flygvapnet‘s pre-WWII trials with dive bombing tactics and the unsuited aircraft fleet for this task. When I found a Hasegawa SOC Seagull floatplane in The Stash™ and looks at the aircraft’s profile, I thought that it could be converted into a two-seat monoplane – what would require massive changes, though.
However, I liked the SOC’s boxy and rustic look, esp. the fuselage, and from this starting point other ingredients/donors were integrated. Work started with the tail. Originally, I wanted to retain the SOCs fin and stabilizer, but eventually found them oversized for a land-based airplane. In the scrap box I found a leftover fin from an Academy P-47, and it turned out to be a very good, smaller alternative, with the benefit that it visually lengthened the rear fuselage. The stabilizers were replaced with leftover parts from a NOVO Supermarine Attacker – an unlikely choice, but their size was good, they blended well into the overall lines of the aircraft, and they helped to stabilize the fin donor. Blending these new parts into to SOC’s hull required massive PSR, though.
The wings were also not an easy choice, and initially I planned the aircraft with a retractable landing gear. I eventually settled on the outer wings (just outside of the gullwing kink) from an MPM Ju 87 B, because of their shape and the archaic “double wings” that would complement the SOC’s rustic fuselage. However, at this point I refrained from the retractable landing gear and instead went for a fixed spatted alternative, left over from an Airfix Hs 123, which would round up the aircraft’s somewhat vintage look. Because the wheels were missing, I inserted two Matchbox MiG-21 wheels (which were left over in the spares bin from two different kits, though). The tail wheel came from an Academy Fw 190.
Cowling and engine inside (thankfully a 9-cylinder radial that could pose as a Mercury) were taken OOB, just the original two-blade propeller was replaced with a more appropriate three-blade alternative, IIRC from a Hobby Boss Grumman F4F. The cockpit was taken OOB, and I also used the two pilot figures from the kit. The rear crew member just had the head re-positioned to look sideways, and had to have the legs chopped off because there’s hardly and space under the desk with the radio set he’s sitting at.
The ventral 500 kg bomb came from a Matchbox Ju 87, the bomb arms are Fw 189 landing gear parts. Additional underwing pylons came from an Intech P-51, outfitted with 50 kg bombs of uncertain origin (they look as if coming from an old Hasegawa kit). The protruding machine gun barrel fairings on the wings were scratched from styrene rod material, with small holes drilled into them.
A real Frankenstein creation, but it does not look bad or implausible!
Painting and markings:
I gave the B 9 a camouflage that was carried by some Flygvapnet aircraft in the late Thirties, primarily by fighters imported from the United States but also some bombers like the B 3 (Ju 86). The IMHO quite attractive scheme consists on the upper surfaces of greenish-yellow zinc chromate primer (Humbrol 81, FS 33481), on top of which a dense net of fine dark green wriggles (supposed to be FS 34079, but I rather used Humbrol 163, RAF Dark Green, because it is more subdued) was manually applied with a thin brush, so that the primer would still shine through, resulting in a mottled camouflage.
On the real aircraft, this was sealed with a protective clear lacquer to which 5% of the dark green had been added, and I copied this procedure on the model, too, using semi-gloss acrylic varnish with a bit of Revell 46 added. The camouflage was wrapped around the wings’ leading edges and the spatted landing gear was painted with the upper camouflage, too.
The undersides were painted with Humbrol 87 (Steel Grey), to come close to the original blue-grey tone, which is supposed to be FS 35190 on this type of camouflage. The tone is quite dark, almost like RAF PRU Blue.
The interior was painted – using a Saab J 21 cockpit as benchmark – in a dark greenish grey (RAL 7009).
The model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel shading on the lower surfaces, because this effect would hardly be recognizable on the highly fragmented upper surface.
The markings are reflecting Flygvapnet’s m/37 regulations, from the direct pre-WWII era when the roundels had turned from black on white to yellow on blue but still lacked the yellow edge around the roundel for more contrast. F6 Västgöta flygflottilj was chosen because it was a dive bomber unit in the late Thirties, and the individual aircraft code (consisting of large white two-digit numbers) was added with the fin and the front of the fuselage. “27” would indicate an aircraft of the unit’s 2nd division, which normally had blue as a standardized color code, incorporated through the blue bands on the spats and the small "2nd div." tag on the rudder (from a contemporary F8 Swedish Gladiator).
Roundels and codes came from an SBS Models sheet, even though they belong to various aircraft types. Everything was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Sun Control by Hunter Douglas
Product: Sliding Shutters
Hunter Douglas Architectural website: Sliding Shutters
Controlling The Internet.
Internationale technische Störungen symptomatischen stabilisiert Einschränkung Manieren Abhören Bösen,
замен структуры чудовищные грандиозные лидеры помпезные мероприятия правила подслушивания проводных,
συγκείμενο εμφανίσεις σκοπούς υποκρισία ανέβασε ανήσυχοι ταχυδακτυλουργικά θεατές επιστασία καταχθόνια σχέδια,
vilitates harum misrepresented culturae landscape indifferentia scriptor artes profundo contemporary suasionem serpentis,
illustrations paralysie affaibli techniques de contenu insertions juxtapositions procédures essentielles édite automatiquement,
cwotâu awdurdodedig druenus cynhyrchu asiantaethau llywodraethol bosibiliadau goresgyniad archddyfarniadau eithaf afresymol safonol,
profittatori conseguenze economia retrospettivi numerose aziende senza scrupoli acquisizioni agenzie diffuse inondazioni,
gníomhairí tionscail ag soláthar infiltrations géarchéime teicneoirí arna maoiniú deimhnithe desertions stiúrthóirí d'aon toil saoirsí deireadh a chur,
オンラインとオフの結果絶望的権威呼吸麻痺を調整する第一の持続的な傾向!
Steve.D.Hammond.
Control performing at the Ritz, Manchester, as part of the North West Calling Punk Festival on Saturday 16th May 2015
Remote controlled Rover, I challenged myself to make a remote controlled 6x6 with all wheel drive, as small as possible, front and rear steering, suspension and as many lights as I can cram into this model as possible. This model contains 1 buggy motor, 1 pf steering servo, 1 pf v2 IR receiver, 1 pf switch, 4 sets of pf LEDs, 2 pf extension cables and 2 old school lego LED lights (for the flashing lights)
flickriver.com/photos/javier1949/popular-interesting/
Naves del Español (Antiguas naves 10, 11 y 12)
Arquitectos Emilio Esteras 2007-10 y Justo Benito 2009-10
El conjunto escénico de 5.900 m2, denominado las Naves del Español, ha sido fruto del trabajo de colaboración del director de teatro Mario Gas, el escenógrafo Jean Guy Lecat, el técnico escenógrafo Francisco Fontanals y el arquitecto municipal Emilio Esteras. La intervención, guiada por los principios de reversibilidad, flexibilidad y versatilidad ha permitido dotar el espacio de múltiples configuraciones escénicas, introduciéndose nuevos elementos y materiales (policarbonato y estructura de andamio) que se yuxtaponen a los existentes y permiten una clara lectura de las intervenciones. Las naves forman un conjunto dotado de gran flexibilidad, que permite el funcionamiento autónomo de tres espacios interconectados.
La nave 12 funciona como foyer o vestíbulo del conjunto escénico, con zona de acogida, cafetería y espacio para realizar espectáculos de pequeño formato. En la nave 11 se sitúa el espacio escénico propiamente dicho, con una disposición muy flexible y versátil. Graderío, escena y maquinaria teatral se han concebido de tal forma que el espacio admite múltiples configuraciones, desde espectáculos teatrales convencionales a propuestas escénicas más arriesgadas. La nave 10, obra del arquitecto Justo Benito en 2009-10, acoge la Sala 2, un espacio escénico docente y de ensayo.
MATADERO MADRID - CENTRO DE CREACIÓN CONTEMPORÁNEA Antiguos Matadero y Mercado Municipal de Ganados
Pº de la Chopera, 2 a 14 C/V a Pza. de Legazpi 8, Vado de Santa Catalina y Av. del Manzanares. Madrid.
Actuación inicial: Luis Bellido González, arquitecto y José Eugenio Ribera Autaste, ingeniero. 1910 (Proyecto) 1910-1925 (Obras).
Matadero de aves y gallinas: Luis Bellido González y Francisco Javier Ferrero Llusiá: 1926 (Proyecto) 1932-1933 (Obras).
Acondicionamiento de la Casa del Reloj, Nave de Terneras y pabellones de acceso para Junta Municipal del Distrito de Arganzuela y salas culturales y deportivas: Rafael Fernández-Rañada Gándara: 1983 (Proyecto) 1983-1984 (Obras).
Rehabilitación de la “nave de patatas” para Invernadero-Palacio de Cristal, antiguo parque del matadero y consolidación estructural de naves del recinto sur: Guillermo Costa Pérez-Herrero: 1990 (Proyecto) 1990-1992 (Obras).
Adaptación de naves para sedes del Ballet Nacional y Compañía Nacional de Danza: Antonio Fernández-Alba y José Luis Castillo-Puche Figueira 1990 (Proyecto) 1993-1999 (Obras)
Vestíbulo y Espacio Intermediae. (nave 17c) Arquitectos Arturo Franco y Fabrice Van Teslaar en colaboración con el arquitecto de interiores Diego Castellanos 2006-07
Naves del Español (naves 10, 11 y 12) Arquitectos Emilio Esteras 2007-10 y Justo Benito 2009-10
Central de Diseño (nave 17) Arquitecto José Antonio García Roldán 2007
Taller y Oficina de Coordinación (parte de la nave 8) Arquitecto Arturo Franco 2010
Calle y Plaza Matadero Arquitectos Ginés Garrido, Carlos Rubio y Fernando Porras 2011
ESCARAVOX Andrés Jaque Arquitectos 2012
Depósito de especies y nuevo acceso por Legazpi. BCP Ingenieros -Luis Benito Olmeda y Francisco Calderón- con María Langarita y Víctor Navarro arquitectos. 2011
Nave 16 Arquitectos: Alejandro Vírseda, José Ignacio Carnicero e Ignacio Vila Almazán, 2011
Nave de Música (Nave 15) Arquitectos: María Langarita y Víctor Navarro, en colaboración con el diseñador mexicano Jerónimo Hagerman, 2011
Cineteca y Cantina Archivo Documenta (nave 17 c, d, e y f) Arquitectos: José María Churtichaga y Cayetana de la Quadra Salcedo 2011
Casa del Lector. Centro Internacional para la Investigación, el Desarrollo y la Difusión de la Lectura de la Fundación Germán Sánchez Ruipérez. (naves 13 y 14, 17b y tres crujías de la nave 17. Arquitecto Antón García Abril. Diseño gráfico y señalización: Alberto Corazón. Interiorismo Jesús Moreno y Asociados 2012
El arquitecto Joaquín Saldaña resulta ganador del concurso convocado por el Ayuntamiento de Madrid el año 1899 para la realización de los nuevos matadero y mercado municipal de ganados en la Dehesa de La Arganzuela, junto al Manzanares, si bien, finalmente las obras se realizan de acuerdo con el proyecto redactado en 1910 por Luis Bellido, arquitecto de propiedades del Ayuntamiento, con la colaboración de J. Eugenio Ribera, ingeniero de reconocido prestigio. El conjunto arquitectónico se compone de 48 edificios agrupados en cinco sectores de producción: dirección y administración, matadero, mercado de abastos, mercado de trabajo y sección sanitaria, cuenta además con viviendas para el personal y capilla; también de sistema de circulaciones y ferrocarril propios... una autentica ciudad laboral.
Sigue el sistema alemán de pabellones aislados, relacionados por medio de viales y presididos por un edificio administrativo, la "Casa del Reloj" situado sobre el eje principal de la composición. Por sus características arquitectónicas y por su escala es uno de los conjuntos edificados más significativos de Madrid. Se advierte en él una unidad estilística y constructiva derivada del uso racional en sus fábricas de tres materiales esenciales ladrillo, mampostería y cerámica, y una cuidadosa introducción de elementos metálicos en la estructura; además de otros aspectos significativos como el empleo de un lenguaje de inspiración neomudéjar muy atenuado, habitual en la arquitectura industrial de la época. El matadero de Madrid sirve de modelo para la construcción en España de este tipo de edificios.
Para el crítico González Amezqueta "Es un ejemplo de gran calidad de arquitectura industrial perfectamente insertado en los procedimientos del ladrillo, con derivaciones hacia el neomudéjar. La mecánica funcional de los procesos laborales no impide discretas acentuaciones ornamentales, ya que todo el proceso constructivo es estrictamente artesanal, con predominio de las técnicas fabricadas del ladrillo en las partes más acertadas".
En 1926, en zona próxima al Vado de Santa Catalina, proyecta Bellido el matadero de gallinas y aves, siendo realizadas las obras, entre 1932 y 1933, bajo la dirección de Francisco Javier Ferrero con la introducción de una clara y cuidada estructura de hormigón pionera en la ciudad y en la que reside uno de sus valores principales.
A partir de 1940 se llevan a cabo diferentes remodelaciones y ampliaciones, entre ellas la de la nave de patatas, el pabellón de autopsias y los abrevaderos.
En la década de 1980, perdida su función original, el Departamento de Conservación de Edificios del Ayuntamiento comienza la rehabilitación sistemática de los edificios del conjunto para su uso como contenedores de actividades culturales, sociales, deportivas y administrativas propias del Ayuntamiento; primero bajo la dirección de Rafael Fernández-Rañada, que acondiciona la Casa del Reloj para Junta Municipal del Distrito de Arganzuela y la nave de terneras para sala cultural y deportiva, y después, de Guillermo Costa que realiza el Palacio de Cristal (rehabilitación de la nave de patatas para invernadero) y el parque del matadero, con la colaboración del ingeniero, también municipal, M. Ángel Martínez Lucio.
Desde 1996 Costa continúa la consolidación estructural de fachadas y cubiertas de 7 naves del recinto sur, sin un uso predeterminado y en distintas fases, a la espera de la realización del proyecto para su adecuación a nuevas actividades de carácter cultural, comercial o de ocio. Finalmente, el conjunto edificado se incluye en el catálogo de bienes a conservar dentro del Plan General de Ordenación Urbana de 1997.
En el extremo norte parte de las antiguas naves de estabulación son cedidas al Instituto Nacional de Artes Escénicas y de la Música (INAEM) para establecer en ellas las sedes del Ballet Nacional de España y de la Compañía Nacional de Danza, según proyecto de Fernández Alba y Castillo-Puche, concluyéndose las obras de adaptación en 1999.
En 2005 se aprueba la modificación del Plan Especial de Intervención, Adecuación Arquitectónica y Control Urbanístico-Ambiental de Usos del recinto del antiguo matadero municipal, que incrementa el uso cultural hasta el 75% del total.
A partir de 2006 el Ayuntamiento se plantea rehabilitar en distintas fases, mediante proyectos derivados de concursos de arquitectura, este inmenso contenedor de casi 150.000 m2, para albergar multitud de eventos y encuentros, fomentando la creatividad de artistas de múltiples especialidades. El conjunto se convierte en un núcleo de actividad cultural que alberga las más importantes citas de la ciudad. Así, se inician actuaciones para convertir el recinto en centro de apoyo a la creación, en campo de experimentación de la nueva arquitectura, pero siguiendo los criterios de intervención del Plan Especial, que establece la preservación de la envolvente de las naves. La línea maestra que ha guiado las intervenciones es la reversibilidad, de modo que los edificios pueden ser fácilmente devueltos a su estado original. Las actuaciones mantienen expresamente las huellas del pasado para reforzar el carácter experimental de las nuevas instituciones que alojan. Se ha buscado el equilibrio entre el respeto máximo al espacio, y una dotación específica, que lo distinga, a través del uso limitado de materiales industriales directos y que, al mismo tiempo, dé servicio a los diferentes usos que pueda albergar.
En 2012, tras la visita del jurado de los premios FAD a Matadero Madrid, decidió reconocer la labor en conjunto de todos los arquitectos que han participado en el proceso de reforma. El fallo valora “tanto la actitud global de la propuesta, que apuesta de una forma valiente por la experimentación y el respeto a los espacios de libertad gestionados desde la sociedad civil, como la conceptualización del proyecto, desde su inicio en el 2007 con la rehabilitación del vestíbulo y el espacio Intermediae, hasta las recientes intervenciones de la Nave 16 y la Nave de Música finalistas en la presente edición de los Premios FAD”. Así mismo, el jurado destacó de Matadero Madrid “la inteligencia colectiva, la unidad que le viene inferida por la arquitectura industrial preexistente, y que con un mínimo de protagonismo exterior de las nuevas intervenciones, en el interior resuelve con rigor y autenticidad las diversas necesidades del extenso programa del centro, buscando no sólo mantener los espacios arquitectónicos y formas estructurales, sino también el carácter, la atmósfera y sobre todo el irrepetible paso del tiempo”.
Ese mismo año el Colegio Oficial de Arquitectos de Madrid otorgó uno de sus premios a las intervenciones en la Cineteca y Archivo Documenta, y en la Nave 16. Por último, destaca la interconexión de Matadero Madrid y Madrid Río mediante la urbanización de los espacios públicos -Calle y Plaza Matadero- por el mismo equipo de arquitectos -Ginés Garrido, Carlos Rubio y Fernando Porras- que proyectó Madrid Río. Está previsto además que dicha conexión, gracias a dos nuevos accesos, se amplíe entre diciembre de 2012 y julio de 2013. Madrid Río ha recibido, entre otros premios, el International Architecture Award 2012 del Chicago Athenaeum of Architecture and Design y el European Centre for Architecture Art Design and Urban Studies, el Premio de Diseño Urbano y Paisajismo Internacional otorgado por el Comité de Críticos de Arquitectura CICA, en el marco de la XIII Bienal de Buenos Aires; o el Premio FAD de Ciudad y Paisaje 2012, entre otros galardones.