In the late 30s the Audacious class saw a thorough modernisation, bringen the ships up to modern standarts with new engines, a revised secondary battery, floatplane facilites, new fire control systems as well as additional AA guns.

Hacked a Hobby King RC system with an Arduino and components from Sparkfun.com to create a custom KAP Control system.

 

I'm pretty sure this is my first video on Flickr. (And kind of uncomfortable with that.) Anyway, I'm always working on some kind of new KAP control system but I rarely finish these projects. For once I actually have a new, finished, working system so here it is. I'll put together some additional information on how I built it in a few days.

 

In brief, it is based on a Hobby King 2.4 GHz R/C system. I used the receiver unmodified. From the transmitter, I removed the 2.4GHz radio module and transplanted it into my own system based on an Arduino processor. I use a thumb joystick for all control inputs: pan, tilt and shutter. An LED ring shows the camera attitude. This enables control when the rig is far away and I can't see the camera itself.

  

PLEASE, NO invitations or self promotions, THEY WILL BE DELETED. My photos are FREE to use, just give me credit and it would be nice if you let me know, thanks.

 

On December 20, 1995, after 25 years of service, CP Rail System made the donation of M-630 No 4563 to the CRHA with a handover ceremony held at the St. Luc shop. Some St. Luc employees had beforehand repainted the unit’s interior and exterior. This ceremony marked for CP the end of the “Big Alco” era.

 

In the mid-sixties, CP purchased 55 DS40 units which proved to be less than a success. Following this experience, CP turned its attention to MLW which was claiming to have a much better wheel-slip control system and a better product - the “M-Line” series. No. 4563 was built in 1969 (serial number M6030-10) as No. 4575 and was originally assigned to the coal fields of British Columbia.

 

However, CP soon found that these locomotives were certainly not living up to expectations. A rash of mechanical failures and trains stalling on the main line because of slipping locomotives proved to be too much. Perhaps the assignment of MLW units to a mostly GMD region and maintenance facility was not the wisest decision on CP's part. The M-630s soon migrated back to eastern Canada, joining their 4700-series sisters, where they were assigned to the St. Luc diesel shop. They saw service in any type of assignment east of Winnipeg, such as intermodal service in the Montreal-Windsor corridor and general freight service between Montreal and Saint-John, N.B.

 

In the mid-eighties, it became quite clear that their years were becoming numbered as they received at that time, their last heavy overhaul. This reality became even clearer when the famed Angus Shops were closed. 4563 is notable for being the last M-Line locomotive to receive such an overhaul. As major failures started to occur in the early nineties, their numbers started to dwindle, and the last one (4706) was retired on December 23, 1993.

 

However, this was not the end of the story, for CP found itself in a severe power shortage as its traffic level rose quite significantly in early 1994. Desperately seeking to put back on the road any operable locomotives, it decided in mid-1994 to "un-retire" the 34 best of the recently retired veterans, and to strip the remaining 29 for any serviceable parts that could be used to keep the remaining locomotives of the MLW fleet running. Restricted to trailing unit status, these battle-scarred warriors saw service for the last time throughout most of the system, with some making it as far as Vancouver, B.C., but time soon caught up with them and the last ones (4743, 5573, 4736) were retired in the summer of 1995. No 4563 had already been retired on November 19, 1994.

 

Locomotive VIA 6921

 

With the 1940s rise in popularity of civil aviation, railways responded by adopting futuristic all-steel designs and by introducing comfortable but slow and heavy trains. In the 1960s, several countries adopted fast trains, or even very fast ones. Japan introduced the first of the high-speed trains—the famous Shinkansen—followed by France and Spain. Achieving high speeds is easy with powerful engines—even more so with jet turbines!—but that is not enough. To achieve high speed, the centrifugal force must be overcome; it is such that a derailment in curves is bound to happen at high speed. To compensate, the outside rail can be raised; however, the higher the speed, the more the rail must be raised. Slower trains would then be too tilted towards the inside of the track and could overturn.

 

Faced with this problem of different types of trains on the same tracks, some countries—such as France—decided to build a separate network for high-speed trains (TGV). Others, such as Spain, Canada and the United States, choose the technological solution of the tilt mechanism. Tracks are not inclined anymore; it is rather the cars that tilt to compensate for the centrifugal force effect.

 

The Spanish Talgo is of a “passive” type and a licenced version was used for the TurboTrain designed by United Aircraft Corporation. The TurboTrain was adopted by the American national carrier Amtrak and the Canadian National in 1968 but only entered service in 1973. In 1978, the Canadian National’s trains are transferred to the new Canadian national carrier, VIA Rail. Assigned to the busiest corridor in the country—Québec—Windsor—this first high-speed Canadian train was unsatisfactory—the titlting system often broke down—and it was finally retired from service in 1982 just in time for the arrival of its replacement: the LRC.

 

In 1966, an Alcan engineer conceived of a fast and light train, using aluminum and aerodynamic design. The concept of what was to become the LRC was presented to the Canadian National; it would offer, as its acronym indicates, a Light, Rapid and Comfortable Train. A consortium made up of Montreal Locomotive Works (engines), Dofasco (bogies and pendulum suspension) and Alcan (cars and bodies) got to work. Pendulum technology was developed by SPAR Aerospace and Sperry Rand Canada. In 1974, the LRC-JV1 prototype started its testing. The following year, Bombardier bought MLW and became the main contractor for the project. It was this company that built the equipment and delivered the first LRC trains in 1977 to Amtrak and in 1981 to VIA Rail Canada.

 

An LRC train consists of two locomotives and low profile cars. The latter being equipped with the “active” compensation system (“active tilt mechanism”) using advanced sensors. The locomotives remained conventional, therefore more reliable; their 16-251-F engines being relics from the 1950s and the bogies being without tilt compensation.

 

For its part, in 1977, the American company Amtrak leased two LRC trains for two years to test this technology in 1980, before rejecting it in 1987. They were transferred to VIA Rail and used on its service to Chicago. LRC locomotives remained in service until 2001. LRC cars are still in service—their pendulum system deactivated—despite the serious problems encountered. For the record, in 1984 No. 6921 had the honour of towing the papal train during John Paul II’s visit.

 

The main obstacles to high-speed trains in Canada are the issues of track sharing with freight trains and unsuitable signalling. The LRC-2s were designed to achieve speeds of 200 km/h on ordinary tracks. The LRC-3 had a more modest target: 167 km/h. Subsequently, for various technical reasons, all LRCs were limited to 153 km/h. In the absence of “Rapidity”, they remained “Light and Comfortable” …

 

Ironically, the US Company Amtrak finally adopted a high-speed train from the Bombardier-Alstom consortium—the Acela—which entered service in 2000 in the northeast corridor forsaken by the Turbo Train and the LRC and which was electrified for the purpose. The Acela benefits from the experience acquired with the LRC’s active tilting mechanism by Bombardier. Since then, several other high-speed rail projects are under construction in the United States. But even, if Bombardier designs and builds very high-speed trains for the world market, as long as there is no dedicated track on the Quebec—Windsor corridor, it will be impossible to reach the level of service of the French TGV or the Japanese trains. Therefore, because of the high cost of the required infrastructures, the high-speed train must finally be understood for what it is: an ecological alternative to the plane on the Quebec—Windsor corridor, the busiest in the country.

 

No. 6921 and 6917 are the only two LRC locomotives kept in a museum. The others have been scrapped or are for sale.

 

All the information used with the pictures was taken from information at the Canadian Railway Museum Site.

www.exporail.org/en/collections/our-collection/

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

Système de régulation des crues du Rhin par inondation du polder de la Moder au niveau des villages de Fort Louis et Neuheausel en Alsace, France.

********************************************

Rhine River flood control system by flooding the Moder polder near the villages of Fort Louis and Neuheausel in Alsace, France.

In the Netherlands, the drainage system is an important matter. The Dutch need a well developed water control system in order to keep large areas from being flooded, because some parts of the Netherlands are below sea level. In Alblasserwaard, problems with water became more and more apparent in the 13th century. Large canals, called 'weteringen', were dug to get rid of the excess water in the polders. However, the drained soil started setting, while the level of the river rose due to the river's sand deposits.

The Kinderdijk Windmills in the Netherlands are an UNESCO World Heritage Site.

POTD Photo Of The Day on Webshots at March 27, 2009.

© www.tomjutte.tk

.

 

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

Mercury-Redstone 3, or Freedom 7, was the first United States human spaceflight, on May 5, 1961, piloted by astronaut Alan Shepard. It was the first crewed flight of Project Mercury. The project had the ultimate objective of putting an astronaut into orbit around the Earth and returning him safely. Shepard's mission was a 15-minute suborbital flight with the primary objective of demonstrating his ability to withstand the high g-forces of launch and atmospheric re-entry.

 

Shepard named his space capsule Freedom 7, setting a precedent for the remaining six Mercury astronauts naming their spacecraft. The number 7 was included in all the crewed Mercury spacecraft names to honor NASA's first group of seven astronauts. His spacecraft reached an altitude of 101.2 nautical miles (116.5 statute miles, 187.5 km) and traveled a downrange distance of 263.1 nautical miles (302.8 statute miles, 487.3 km). It was the fourth Mercury flight launched with the Mercury-Redstone Launch Vehicle,[Note 1] from Cape Canaveral, Florida, close to the Atlantic Ocean.

 

During the flight, Shepard observed the Earth and tested the capsule's attitude control system, turning the capsule around to face its blunt heat shield forward for atmospheric re-entry. He also tested the retrorockets which would return later missions from orbit, though the capsule did not have enough energy to remain in orbit. After re-entry, the capsule landed by parachute on the North Atlantic Ocean off the Bahamas. Shepard and the capsule were picked up by helicopter and brought to U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Lake Champlain.

 

The mission was a technical success, though American pride in the accomplishment was dampened by the fact that just three weeks before, the Soviet Union had launched the first human in space, Yuri Gagarin, who completed one orbit on Vostok 1. In 2017 the first National Astronaut Day was held on May 5 to pay tribute to this first U.S. flight.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-Redstone_3

 

Experience all the History and Artifacts that Historic Auto Attractions has to offer. More than just a display of automobiles, It’s a journey through time! With over 80,000 sq. ft. of exhibits including the world’s largest collection of Presidential and World Leader’s Limousines, a vast collection of Gangster Era vehicles and memorabilia, a large Elvis Presley display and memorabilia, TV Land cars, and Cars from Hit Movies such as Batman, Ghostbusters, and Back to the Future.

We also house one of the most extensive collections of John F. Kennedy & Kennedy Family artifacts & memorabilia in the country. New in 2022 is our updated Illinois Stock Car Hall of Fame headed by Art Ferhman as well an updated High Performance Machines gallery. The museum adds new vehicles and exhibits on a regular basis and also has many WWII artifacts from both Allied and Axis powers on display, including uniforms, maps, swords, knives, flags, banners and more. We also have a large gift shop with unique gifts. Group rates and a banquet area is also available. Please call for more details.

More info on this fun interesting museum can be found here,

www.historicautoattractions.com/

Electro Motive Division introduced the 3,500 horsepower GP50 model in 1980. A total of 278 units were built before production ended in 1985. The GP50 was the first production locomotive to feature EMD's Super Series wheelslip control system, providing a 33% increase in adhesion compared to conventional locomotives. The 50 series were also the first production units equipped with microprocessors.

 

Chicago & North Western acquired 50 GP50s, delivered between May and September 1980. CNW 5059 was photographed at North Yard in Salt Lake City on June 10, 1986. 48 of 50s survived into the merger with Union Pacific in 1995. The remaining fleet was retired from the UP roster at the end of 2002.

www.wsf-tex.com/product/automatic-winding-machine.html

 

Automatic Winding Machine is a high speed automatic coil winding machine. This automatic winding machine is applied to wind the sewing threads, embroidery threads, nylon threads and so on. You can achieve a good shape formation with this high speed automatic winding machine. This automatic coil winding machine provides a good solution for yarns while keeping assured safety and reliability and broad applicability. If you buy this automatic winding machine, you immediately got a good assistant to deal with the yarn which has high efficiency and also is easy to operate.

 

The automatic coil winding machine is equipped with an electro-magnetic tension control system, a frequency-change slotted spool yarn guide device, and a pump-based cycling-type oiling device. All devices above ensure the automatic winding machine can have a great quality of packages. We can improve the machine if you have your own requirements as it is a customized winding machine. As a winder supplier, we will do our best to meet your any requirements on yarns.

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

These plug and play remote control systems that have become more prevalent on shortlines in recent years sure do mar the looks of the locomotive. But if that's what it takes to keep these classic dinosaurs running and pulling frieght I'm ok with it!

 

Anyway, we tried to at least see each of the four Arkansas and Missouri Railroad jobs on duty from Springdale the day we set aside to visit. I already shared one shot of the SMTN road train with the SD70ACEs and several of the SFLO Springdale local. While we would spend most of our day with the latter we did at least see the other two jobs. Here is the Sand Remote job which was on duty at 0700 that we found out near the end of the short Bentonville branch which now only extends from Rogers only about 3.5 miles to the Bentonville line but prior to 1940 reached about 45 miles to Grove, OK. The job was found west of the North 24th St. crossing slowly dumping sand cars at the SMG Materials pit. Sole power was AM 32 an Alco C424 blt. Apr. 1965 as Belt Railway of Chicago 601.

 

Rogers, Arkansas

Thursday September 2, 2021

DSC_0007

Manufacturer: Boeing

Operator: NATO E-3A Component, Geilenkirchen AIr Base, Germany

Type: A-3A Sentry, (LX-N 90456) Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AWACS),

Event/ Location: 2018 Tiger Meet, Posnan Air Force Base, Poland

Comment: NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen (E-3A Component) (IATA: GKE, ICAO: ETNG) is located near Geilenkirchen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. It is the Main Operating Base of the NATO Boeing E-3 Sentry Component, one of two operational elements of the NATO Airborne Early Warning & Control Force.

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

A northbound sand extra was zipping through Mount Prospect just as the afternoon sun was swinging around to an almost-acceptable angle. SD40N 1999 leads the way; the 'N' part of the designation comes from UP's use of the NEXSYS control system from ZTR Control Systems, replacing the older Dash 2 component cards and control systems.

This is a close-up view of the forward port-side reaction control system (RCS) on the Space Shuttle Discovery.

 

Each RCS (two forward and two aft) consists of high-pressure gaseous helium storage tanks, pressure regulation and relief systems, a fuel and oxidiser tank, a system that distributes propellant to its engines, and thermal control systems (electrical heaters). They provide the thrust for attitude (rotational) manoeuvres (pitch, yaw and roll) and for small velocity changes along the orbiter axis (translation manoeuvres).

 

Around them you can see some of the multitude of individually-labelled differently sized and shaped tiles giving the Shuttle its thermal protection, so necessary for successful re-entries into the atmosphere.

 

I was lucky enough to turn up (by accident) at the Udvar-Hazy Center on the day that Discovery was first unveiled to the public.

Loading of an Erieye radar antenna. The Erieye radar system, is an Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C) developed by Saab Electronic Defence Systems (formerly Ericsson Microwave Systems) of Sweden. It uses active electronically scanned array (AESA) technology. The Erieye is used on a variety of aircraft platforms, such as the Brazilian Embraer E-99 or EMB-145. It has recently been implemented on the Saab 2000 aircraft.

  

The Erieye Ground Interface Segment (EGIS; not to be confused with the Aegis combat system) is a major component of the software used by the Erieye system.

  

The radar provides 300 degree coverage and has an instrumental range of 450 km and detection range of 350 km in a dense hostile electronic warfare environment—in heavy radar clutter and at low target altitudes. In addition to this, the radar is also capable of identifying friends or foes, and has a sea surveillance mode.

  

The Erieye system has full interoperability with NATO air defence command and control systems.

SLR Class :- S9

Introduction year :- 2000

No of Sets :- 15

Power car Nos :- 849 to 863

Builder :- Sifang Loco. & Rolling Stock Works

State :- China

Prime Mover :- MTU - V12 396 TC 14

Mode of Power transmission : - Diesel Electric (AC to DC Power Transmission)

Power :- 1400 H.P.

rpm :- 1500

Weight :- 67 ton

Length :- 65’

Wheel arrangement :- Bo-Bo

Brake system :- Air and Dynamic

Max speed :- 100 Km/h

Gauge :- 1676 mm

Type :- Diesel Multiple Unit

Set Formation :- One power car,Four 3rd Class Compartment and 3rd Class dummy car

Purpose :- Suburban and Commuter service.

 

S9 855,856,857,858 and 863 Installed new control system by CSR Qingdao Sifang Co. Ltd in 2017

S9 851 and 852 Installed new control system by Medha Servo Drives Pvt Ltd in 2022

 

Information as at 02.12.2024

 

This week in 1967, AS-500D configuration I testing ended with a special test to verify the flight control system. The test program included roll, pitch, yaw and longitudinal testing, completed earlier in 1967. AS-500D was a dynamic test article of the Saturn V space vehicle. Here, the Apollo spacecraft leaves the Manned Spacecraft Operations Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center on its way to the Vehicle Assembly Building where it will be mated with the Saturn launch vehicle. The Saturn V was designed at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. Now through December 2022, NASA will mark the 50th anniversary of the Apollo Program that landed a dozen astronauts on the Moon between July 1969 and December 1972, and the first U.S. crewed mission -- Apollo 8 -- that circumnavigated the Moon in December 1968. The NASA History Program is responsible for generating, disseminating and preserving NASA's remarkable history and providing a comprehensive understanding of the institutional, cultural, social, political, economic, technological and scientific aspects of NASA 's activities in aeronautics and space. For more pictures like this one and to connect to NASA's history, visit the Marshall History Program's webpage.

 

Image credit: NASA

 

Read more

 

Marshall History

 

For more NASA History photos

 

NASA Media Usage Guidelines

 

An Air Force Lockheed Martin F-22 "Raptor" assigned to the 3rd Wing flies over Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, Feb. 27, 2018. The Lockheed Martin F-22 "Raptor" is the U.S. Air Force’s premium fifth-generation fighter asset.

  

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The Lockheed Martin F-22 "Raptor" is a fifth-generation, single-seat, twin-engine, all-weather stealth tactical fighter aircraft developed for the United States Air Force (USAF). The result of the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program, the aircraft was designed primarily as an air superiority fighter, but also has ground attack, electronic warfare, and signal intelligence capabilities. The prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, built most of the F-22's airframe and weapons systems and conducted final assembly, while Boeing provided the wings, aft fuselage, avionics integration, and training systems.

 

The aircraft was variously designated F-22 and F/A-22 before it formally entered service in December 2005 as the F-22A. Despite its protracted development and various operational issues, USAF officials consider the F-22 a critical component of the service's tactical air power. Its combination of stealth, aerodynamic performance, and situational awareness enable unprecedented air combat capabilities.

 

Service officials had originally planned to buy a total of 750 ATFs. In 2009, the program was cut to 187 operational production aircraft due to high costs, a lack of clear air-to-air missions due to delays in Russian and Chinese fighter programs, a ban on exports, and development of the more versatile F-35. The last F-22 was delivered in 2012.

  

Development

 

Origins

 

In 1981, the U.S. Air Force identified a requirement for an Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) to replace the F-15 "Eagle" and F-16 "Fighting Falcon". Code named "Senior Sky", this air-superiority fighter program was influenced by emerging worldwide threats, including new developments in Soviet air defense systems and the proliferation of the Su-27 "Flanker"- and MiG-29 "Fulcrum"-class of fighter aircraft. It would take advantage of the new technologies in fighter design on the horizon, including composite materials, lightweight alloys, advanced flight control systems, more powerful propulsion systems, and most importantly, stealth technology. In 1983, the ATF concept development team became the System Program Office (SPO) and managed the program at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The demonstration and validation (Dem/Val) request for proposals (RFP) was issued in September 1985, with requirements placing strong emphasis on stealth and supercruise. Of the seven bidding companies, Lockheed and Northrop were selected on 31 October 1986. Lockheed teamed with Boeing and General Dynamics while Northrop teamed with McDonnell Douglas, and the two contractor teams undertook a 50-month Dem/Val phase, culminating in the flight test of two technology demonstrator prototypes, the YF-22 and the YF-23, respectively.

 

Dem/Val was focused on risk reduction and technology development plans over specific aircraft designs. Contractors made extensive use of analytical and empirical methods, including computational fluid dynamics, wind-tunnel testing, and radar cross-section calculations and pole testing; the Lockheed team would conduct nearly 18,000 hours of wind-tunnel testing. Avionics development was marked by extensive testing and prototyping and supported by ground and flying laboratories. During Dem/Val, the SPO used the results of performance and cost trade studies conducted by contractor teams to adjust ATF requirements and delete ones that were significant weight and cost drivers while having marginal value. The short takeoff and landing (STOL) requirement was relaxed in order to delete thrust-reversers, saving substantial weight. As avionics was a major cost driver, side-looking radars were deleted, and the dedicated infra-red search and track (IRST) system was downgraded from multi-color to single color and then deleted as well. However, space and cooling provisions were retained to allow for future addition of these components. The ejection seat requirement was downgraded from a fresh design to the existing McDonnell Douglas ACES II. Despite efforts by the contractor teams to rein in weight, the takeoff gross weight estimate was increased from 50,000 lb (22,700 kg) to 60,000 lb (27,200 kg), resulting in engine thrust requirement increasing from 30,000 lbf (133 kN) to 35,000 lbf (156 kN) class.

 

Each team produced two prototype air vehicles for Dem/Val, one for each of the two engine options. The YF-22 had its maiden flight on 29 September 1990 and in flight tests achieved up to Mach 1.58 in supercruise. After the Dem/Val flight test of the prototypes, on 23 April 1991, Secretary of the USAF Donald Rice announced the Lockheed team as the winner of the ATF competition. The YF-23 design was considered stealthier and faster, while the YF-22, with its thrust vectoring nozzles, was more maneuverable as well as less expensive and risky. The aviation press speculated that the Lockheed team's design was also more adaptable to the U.S. Navy's Navalized Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF), but by 1992, the Navy had abandoned NATF.

  

Production and procurement

 

As the program moved to full-scale development, or the Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) stage, the production version had notable differences from the YF-22, despite having a broadly similar shape. The swept-back angle of the leading edge was decreased from 48° to 42°, while the vertical stabilizers were shifted rearward and decreased in area by 20%. To improve pilot visibility, the canopy was moved forward 7 inches (18 cm), and the engine intakes moved rearward 14 inches (36 cm). The shapes of the wing and stabilator trailing edges were refined to improve aerodynamics, strength, and stealth characteristics. Increasing weight during development caused slight reductions in range and maneuver performance.

 

Prime contractor Lockheed Martin Aeronautics manufactured the majority of the airframe and performed final assembly at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia; program partner Boeing Defense, Space & Security provided additional airframe components as well as avionics integration and training systems. The first F-22, an EMD aircraft with tail number 4001, was unveiled at Marietta, Georgia, on 9 April 1997, and first flew on 7 September 1997. Production, with the first lot awarded in September 2000, supported over 1,000 subcontractors and suppliers from 46 states and up to 95,000 jobs, and spanned 15 years at a peak rate of roughly two airplanes per month. In 2006, the F-22 development team won the Collier Trophy, American aviation's most prestigious award. Due to the aircraft's advanced nature, contractors have been targeted by cyberattacks and technology theft.

 

The USAF originally envisioned ordering 750 ATFs at a total program cost of $44.3 billion and procurement cost of $26.2 billion in fiscal year (FY) 1985 dollars, with production beginning in 1994. The 1990 Major Aircraft Review led by Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney reduced this to 648 aircraft beginning in 1996. By 1997, funding instability had further cut the total to 339, which was again reduced to 277 by 2003. In 2004, the Department of Defense (DoD) further reduced this to 183 operational aircraft, despite the USAF's preference for 381. A multi-year procurement plan was implemented in 2006 to save $15 billion, with total program cost projected to be $62 billion for 183 F-22s distributed to seven combat squadrons. In 2008, Congress passed a defense spending bill that raised the total orders for production aircraft to 187.

 

The first two F-22s built were EMD aircraft in the Block 1.0 configuration for initial flight testing, while the third was a Block 2.0 aircraft built to represent the internal structure of production airframes and enabled it to test full flight loads. Six more EMD aircraft were built in the Block 10 configuration for development and upgrade testing, with the last two considered essentially production quality jets. Production for operational squadrons consisted of 37 Block 20 training aircraft and 149 Block 30/35 combat aircraft; one of the Block 35 aircraft is dedicated to flight sciences at Edwards Air Force Base.

 

The numerous new technologies in the F-22 resulted in substantial cost overruns and delays. Many capabilities were deferred to post-service upgrades, reducing the initial cost but increasing total program cost. As production wound down in 2011, the total program cost is estimated to be about $67.3 billion, with $32.4 billion spent on Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and $34.9 billion on procurement and military construction (MILCON) in then year dollars. The incremental cost for an additional F-22 was estimated at about $138 million in 2009.

 

Ban on exports

 

The F-22 cannot be exported under US federal law to protect its stealth technology and other high-tech features. Customers for U.S. fighters are acquiring earlier designs such as the F-15 "Eagle" and F-16 "Fighting Falcon" or the newer F-35 "Lightning II", which contains technology from the F-22 but was designed to be cheaper, more flexible, and available for export. In September 2006, Congress upheld the ban on foreign F-22 sales. Despite the ban, the 2010 defense authorization bill included provisions requiring the DoD to prepare a report on the costs and feasibility for an F-22 export variant, and another report on the effect of F-22 export sales on U.S. aerospace industry.

 

Some Australian politicians and defense commentators proposed that Australia should attempt to purchase F-22s instead of the planned F-35s, citing the F-22's known capabilities and F-35's delays and developmental uncertainties. However, the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) determined that the F-22 was unable to perform the F-35's strike and close air support roles. The Japanese government also showed interest in the F-22 for its Replacement-Fighter program. The Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) would reportedly require fewer fighters for its mission if it obtained the F-22, thus reducing engineering and staffing costs. However, in 2009 it was reported that acquiring the F-22 would require increases to the Japanese government's defense budget beyond the historical 1 percent of its GDP. With the end of F-22 production, Japan chose the F-35 in December 2011. Israel also expressed interest, but eventually chose the F-35 because of the F-22's price and unavailability.

 

Production termination

 

Throughout the 2000s, the need for F-22s was debated, due to rising costs and the lack of relevant adversaries. In 2006, Comptroller General of the United States David Walker found that "the DoD has not demonstrated the need" for more investment in the F-22, and further opposition to the program was expressed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon R. England, Senator John McCain, and Chairman of U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services Senator John Warner. The F-22 program lost influential supporters in 2008 after the forced resignations of Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force General T. Michael Moseley.

 

In November 2008, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated that the F-22 was not relevant in post-Cold War conflicts such as irregular warfare operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in April 2009, under the new Obama Administration, he called for ending production in FY2011, leaving the USAF with 187 production aircraft. In July, General James Cartwright, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated to the Senate Committee on Armed Services his reasons for supporting termination of F-22 production. They included shifting resources to the multirole F-35 to allow proliferation of fifth-generation fighters for three service branches and preserving the F/A-18 production line to maintain the military's electronic warfare (EW) capabilities in the Boeing EA-18G "Growler". Issues with the F-22's reliability and availability also raised concerns. After President Obama threatened to veto further production, the Senate voted in July 2009 in favor of ending production and the House subsequently agreed to abide by the 187 production aircraft cap. Gates stated that the decision was taken in light of the F-35's capabilities, and in 2010, he set the F-22 requirement to 187 aircraft by lowering the number of major regional conflict preparations from two to one.

 

In 2010, USAF initiated a study to determine the costs of retaining F-22 tooling for a future Service Life Extension Program (SLEP). A RAND Corporation paper from this study estimated that restarting production and building an additional 75 F-22s would cost $17 billion, resulting in $227 million per aircraft, or $54 million higher than the flyaway cost. Lockheed Martin stated that restarting the production line itself would cost about $200 million. Production tooling and associated documentation were subsequently stored at the Sierra Army Depot, allowing the retained tooling to support the fleet life cycle. There were reports that attempts to retrieve this tooling found empty containers, but a subsequent audit found that the tooling was stored as expected.

 

Russian and Chinese fighter developments have fueled concern, and in 2009, General John Corley, head of Air Combat Command, stated that a fleet of 187 F-22s would be inadequate, but Secretary Gates dismissed General Corley's concern. In 2011, Gates explained that Chinese fifth-generation fighter developments had been accounted for when the number of F-22s was set, and that the U.S. would have a considerable advantage in stealth aircraft in 2025, even with F-35 delays. In December 2011, the 195th and final F-22 was completed out of 8 test EMD and 187 operational aircraft produced; the aircraft was delivered to the USAF on 2 May 2012.

 

In April 2016, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee proposed legislation that would direct the Air Force to conduct a cost study and assessment associated with resuming production of the F-22. Since the production halt directed in 2009 by then Defense Secretary Gates, lawmakers and the Pentagon noted that air warfare systems of Russia and China were catching up to those of the U.S. Lockheed Martin has proposed upgrading the Block 20 training aircraft into combat-coded Block 30/35 versions as a way to increase numbers available for deployment. On 9 June 2017, the Air Force submitted their report to Congress stating they had no plans to restart the F-22 production line due to economic and operational issues; it estimated it would cost approximately $50 billion to procure 194 additional F-22s at a cost of $206–$216 million per aircraft, including approximately $9.9 billion for non-recurring start-up costs and $40.4 billion for aircraft procurement costs.

 

Upgrades

 

The first aircraft with combat-capable Block 3.0 software flew in 2001. Increment 2, the first upgrade program, was implemented in 2005 for Block 20 aircraft onward and enabled the employment of Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM). Certification of the improved AN/APG-77(V)1 radar was completed in March 2007, and airframes from production Lot 5 onward are fitted with this radar, which incorporates air-to-ground modes. Increment 3.1 for Block 30 aircraft onward provided improved ground-attack capability through synthetic aperture radar mapping and radio emitter direction finding, electronic attack and Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) integration; testing began in 2009 and the first upgraded aircraft was delivered in 2011. To address oxygen deprivation issues, F-22s were fitted with an automatic backup oxygen system (ABOS) and modified life support system starting in 2012.

 

Increment 3.2 for Block 35 aircraft is a two-part upgrade process; 3.2A focuses on electronic warfare, communications and identification, while 3.2B includes geolocation improvements and a new stores management system to show the correct symbols for the AIM-9X and AIM-120D. To enable two-way communication with other platforms, the F-22 can use the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) as a gateway. The planned Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) integration was cut due to development delays and lack of proliferation among USAF platforms. The F-22 fleet is planned to start receiving Increment 3.2B as well as a software upgrade for cryptography capabilities and avionics stability in May 2019. A Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Joint (MIDS-J) radio that replaces the current Link-16 receive-only box is expected to be operational by 2020. Subsequent upgrades are also focusing on having an open architecture to enable faster future enhancements.

 

In 2024, funding is projected to begin for the F-22 mid-life upgrade (MLU), which is expected to include new sensors and antennas, hardware refresh, cockpit improvements, and a helmet mounted display and cuing system. Other enhancements being developed include IRST functionality for the AN/AAR-56 Missile Launch Detector (MLD) and more durable stealth coating based on the F-35's.

 

The F-22 was designed for a service life of 8,000 flight hours, with a $350 million "structures retrofit program". Investigations are being made for upgrades to extend their useful lives further. In the long term, the F-22 is expected to be superseded by a sixth-generation jet fighter to be fielded in the 2030s.

  

Design

 

Overview

 

The F-22 "Raptor" is a fifth-generation fighter that is considered fourth generation in stealth aircraft technology by the USAF. It is the first operational aircraft to combine supercruise, supermaneuverability, stealth, and sensor fusion in a single weapons platform. The F-22 has four empennage surfaces, retractable tricycle landing gear, and clipped delta wings with reverse trailing edge sweep and leading edge extensions running to the upper outboard corner of the inlets. Flight control surfaces include leading-edge flaps, flaperons, ailerons, rudders on the canted vertical stabilizers, and all-moving horizontal tails (stabilators); for speed brake function, the ailerons deflect up, flaperons down, and rudders outwards to increase drag.

 

The aircraft's dual Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 augmented turbofan engines are closely spaced and incorporate pitch-axis thrust vectoring nozzles with a range of ±20 degrees; each engine has maximum thrust in the 35,000 lbf (156 kN) class. The F-22's thrust-to-weight ratio at typical combat weight is nearly at unity in maximum military power and 1.25 in full afterburner. Maximum speed without external stores is approximately Mach 1.8 at military power and greater than Mach 2 with afterburners.

 

The F-22's high cruise speed and operating altitude over prior fighters improve the effectiveness of its sensors and weapon systems, and increase survivability against ground defenses such as surface-to-air missiles. The aircraft is among only a few that can supercruise, or sustain supersonic flight without using fuel-inefficient afterburners; it can intercept targets which subsonic aircraft would lack the speed to pursue and an afterburner-dependent aircraft would lack the fuel to reach. The F-22's thrust and aerodynamics enable regular combat speeds of Mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet (15,000 m). The use of internal weapons bays permits the aircraft to maintain comparatively higher performance over most other combat-configured fighters due to a lack of aerodynamic drag from external stores. The aircraft's structure contains a significant amount of high-strength materials to withstand stress and heat of sustained supersonic flight. Respectively, titanium alloys and composites comprise 39% and 24% of the structural weight.

 

The F-22's aerodynamics, relaxed stability, and powerful thrust-vectoring engines give it excellent maneuverability and energy potential across its flight envelope. The airplane has excellent high alpha (angle of attack) characteristics, capable of flying at trimmed alpha of over 60° while maintaining roll control and performing maneuvers such as the Herbst maneuver (J-turn) and Pugachev's Cobra. The flight control system and full-authority digital engine control (FADEC) make the aircraft highly departure resistant and controllable, thus giving the pilot carefree handling.

  

Stealth

 

The F-22 was designed to be highly difficult to detect and track by radar. Measures to reduce radar cross-section (RCS) include airframe shaping such as alignment of edges, fixed-geometry serpentine inlets and curved vanes that prevent line-of-sight of the engine faces and turbines from any exterior view, use of radar-absorbent material (RAM), and attention to detail such as hinges and pilot helmets that could provide a radar return. The F-22 was also designed to have decreased radio emissions, infrared signature and acoustic signature as well as reduced visibility to the naked eye. The aircraft's flat thrust-vectoring nozzles reduce infrared emissions of the exhaust plume to mitigate the threat of infrared homing ("heat seeking") surface-to-air or air-to-air missiles. Additional measures to reduce the infrared signature include special topcoat and active cooling of leading edges to manage the heat buildup from supersonic flight.

 

Compared to previous stealth designs like the F-117, the F-22 is less reliant on RAM, which are maintenance-intensive and susceptible to adverse weather conditions. Unlike the B-2, which requires climate-controlled hangars, the F-22 can undergo repairs on the flight line or in a normal hangar. The F-22 has a Signature Assessment System which delivers warnings when the radar signature is degraded and necessitates repair. While the F-22's exact RCS is classified, in 2009 Lockheed Martin released information indicating that from certain angles the aircraft has an RCS of 0.0001 m² or −40 dBsm – equivalent to the radar reflection of a "steel marble". Effectively maintaining the stealth features can decrease the F-22's mission capable rate to 62–70%.

 

The effectiveness of the stealth characteristics is difficult to gauge. The RCS value is a restrictive measurement of the aircraft's frontal or side area from the perspective of a static radar. When an aircraft maneuvers it exposes a completely different set of angles and surface area, potentially increasing radar observability. Furthermore, the F-22's stealth contouring and radar absorbent materials are chiefly effective against high-frequency radars, usually found on other aircraft. The effects of Rayleigh scattering and resonance mean that low-frequency radars such as weather radars and early-warning radars are more likely to detect the F-22 due to its physical size. However, such radars are also conspicuous, susceptible to clutter, and have low precision. Additionally, while faint or fleeting radar contacts make defenders aware that a stealth aircraft is present, reliably vectoring interception to attack the aircraft is much more challenging. According to the USAF an F-22 surprised an Iranian F-4 "Phantom II" that was attempting to intercept an American UAV, despite Iran's assertion of having military VHF radar coverage over the Persian Gulf.

ISS048e017204 (07/01/2016) --- Image of the undocked Progress 62P supply spacecraft against a backdrop of Earth and space during a test of the upgraded Teleoperator Control System (TORU) manual docking system.

..."...There's that big shiny eye again. Time to take off!"

 

They sat and gleamed in the sunlight. I stalked, taking a shot every step or two. I hoped for a silhouette of an open beak, but liked this - look left, look right, look left again - routine, just before departure.

 

(Yes, Mac. Another jokey one.) (And I didn't have to horizontalize.)

 

On Black

Red Flag 14-1's activity officially kicks off for the day when the E-3 Sentry departs. This E-3B Sentry is assigned to the 964th Airborne Air Control Squadron, 552d Air Control Wing, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.

From my set entitled “Our Home, Streetsville”

www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/sets/72157600265395738/

In my collection entitled “Places”

www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/collections/7215760074...

In my photostream

www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/

 

I’ve always lived close to railway lines. When I was growing up in Orangeville, Ontario, I lived near the main station. Both the Canadian National Railway (CNR) and the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) passed through town. When my sister and I moved to a fifty acre farm in Dixie, Ontario (near Toronto) in 1960, the CPR bisected our land.

 

For the twenty-two years Karen and I have lived at our current address in Streetsville, Ontario, the CPR has been our neighbour across the back fence. People ask us, “Don’t the trains bother you?” We answer that we don’t even hear them.

 

We sit on the deck and view a lot of interesting stuff go by. One day I watched a trainload of tanks pass. Didn’t know Canada had so many tanks. We also see intriguing graffiti on the sides of tankers and boxcars. And there are cars from all over the U.S. and Canada.

 

This is the first shot of the trains I have taken from the deck, but there will be more. It’s best to take such pictures after the leaves have dropped, since it’s hard to see the trains through the summer foliage.

 

Reproduced from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Pacific_Railway

The Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR; AAR reporting marks CP, CPAA, CPI), known as CP Rail between 1968 and 1996, is a Canadian Class I railway operated by Canadian Pacific Railway Limited. Its rail network stretches from Vancouver to Montreal, and also serves major cities in the United States such as Minneapolis, Chicago, and New York City. Its headquarters are in Calgary, Alberta.

 

The railway was originally built between eastern Canada and British Columbia between 1881 and 1885 (connecting with Ottawa Valley and Georgian Bay area lines built earlier), fulfilling a promise extended to British Columbia when it entered Confederation in 1871. It was Canada's first transcontinental railway. Now primarily a freight railway, the CPR was for decades the only practical means of long distance passenger transport in most regions of Canada, and was instrumental in the settlement and development of Western Canada. The CP company became one of the largest and most powerful in Canada, a position it held as late as 1975.[1] Its primary passenger services were eliminated in 1986 after being assumed by VIA Rail Canada in 1978. A beaver was chosen as the railway's logo because it is one of the national symbols of Canada and represents the hardworking character of the company. The object of both praise and condemnation for over 120 years, the CPR remains an indisputable icon of Canadian nationalism.

 

The Canadian Pacific Railway is a public company with over 15,000 employees and market capitalization of 7 billion USD in 2008.[2]

 

Canada's very existence depended on the successful completion of the major civil engineering project, the creation of a transcontinental railway. Creation of the Canadian Pacific Railway was a task originally undertaken for a combination of reasons by the Conservative government of Prime Minister Sir John A. Macdonald. British Columbia had insisted upon a transport link to the east as a condition for joining the Confederation of Canada (initially requesting a wagon road). The government however, proposed to build a railway linking the Pacific province to the eastern provinces within ten years of July 20, 1871. Macdonald also saw it as essential to the creation of a unified Canadian nation that would stretch across the continent. Moreover, manufacturing interests in Quebec and Ontario desired access to sources of raw materials and markets in Canada's west.

 

The first obstacle to its construction was economic. The logical route went through the American Midwest and the city of Chicago, Illinois. In addition to the obvious difficulty of building a railroad through the Canadian Rockies, an entirely Canadian route would require crossing 1,600 km (1,000 miles) of rugged terrain of the barren Canadian Shield and muskeg of Northern Ontario. To ensure this routing, the government offered huge incentives including vast grants of land in Western Canada.

 

In 1872, Sir John A. Macdonald and other high-ranking politicians, swayed by bribes in the so-called Pacific Scandal, granted federal contracts to Hugh Allan's "Canada Pacific Railway Company" (which was unrelated to the current company) and to the Inter-Ocean Railway Company. Because of this scandal, the Conservative party was removed from office in 1873. The new Liberal prime minister, Alexander Mackenzie, began construction of segments of the railway as a public enterprise under the supervision of the Department of Public Works. The Thunder Bay branch linking Lake Superior to Winnipeg was commenced in 1875. Progress was discouragingly slow because of the lack of public money. With Sir John A. Macdonald's return to power on October 16, 1878, a more aggressive construction policy was adopted. Macdonald confirmed that Port Moody would be the terminus of the transcontinental railway, and announced that the railway would follow the Fraser and Thompson rivers between Port Moody and Kamloops. In 1879, the federal government floated bonds in London and called for tenders to construct the 206 km (128 mile) section of the railway from Yale, British Columbia to Savona's Ferry on Kamloops Lake. The contract was awarded to Andrew Onderdonk, whose men started work on May 15, 1880. After the completion of that section, Onderdonk received contracts to build between Yale and Port Moody, and between Savona's Ferry and Eagle Pass.

 

On October 21, 1880, a new syndicate, unrelated to Hugh Allan's, signed a contract with the Macdonald government. They agreed to build the railway in exchange for $25,000,000 (approximately $625,000,000 in modern Canadian dollars) in credit from the Canadian government and a grant of 25,000,000 acres (100,000 km²) of land. The government transferred to the new company those sections of the railway it had constructed under government ownership. The government also defrayed surveying costs and exempted the railway from property taxes for 20 years. The Montreal-based syndicate officially comprised five men: George Stephen, James J. Hill, Duncan McIntyre, Richard B. Angus, and John Stewart Kennedy. Donald A. Smith and Norman Kittson were unofficial silent partners with a significant financial interest. On February 15, 1881, legislation confirming the contract received royal assent, and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company was formally incorporated the next day.

 

The CPR started its westward expansion from Bonfield, Ontario (previously called Callander Station) where the first spike was driven into a sunken railway tie. Bonfield, Ontario was inducted into Canadian Railway Hall of Fame in 2002 as the CPR First Spike location. That was the point where the Canada Central Railway extension ended. The CCR was owned by Duncan McIntyre who amalgamated it with the CPR and became one of the handful of officers of the newly formed CPR. The CCR started in Brockville and extended to Pembroke. It then followed a westward route along the Ottawa River passing through places like Cobden, Deux-Rivières, and eventually to Mattawa at the confluence of the Mattawa and Ottawa Rivers. It then proceeded cross-country towards its final destination Bonfield (previously called Callander Station).

 

Duncan McIntyre and his contractor James Worthington piloted the CCR expansion. Worthington continued on as the construction superintendent for the CPR past Bonfield. He remained with the CPR for about a year until he left the company. McIntyre was uncle to John Ferguson who staked out future North Bay after getting assurance from his uncle and Worthington that it would be the divisional and a location of some importance.

 

It was assumed that the railway would travel through the rich "Fertile Belt" of the North Saskatchewan River valley and cross the Rocky Mountains via the Yellowhead Pass, a route suggested by Sir Sandford Fleming based on a decade of work. However, the CPR quickly discarded this plan in favour of a more southerly route across the arid Palliser's Triangle in Saskatchewan and through Kicking Horse Pass over the Field Hill. This route was more direct and closer to the American border, making it easier for the CPR to keep American railways from encroaching on the Canadian market. However, this route also had several disadvantages.

 

One consequence was that the CPR would need to find a route through the Selkirk Mountains, as at the time it was not known whether a route even existed. The job of finding a pass was assigned to a surveyor named Major Albert Bowman Rogers. The CPR promised him a cheque for $5,000 and that the pass would be named in his honour. Rogers became obsessed with finding the pass that would immortalize his name. He found the pass on May 29, 1881, and true to its word, the CPR named the pass "Rogers Pass" and gave him the cheque. This however, he at first refused to cash, preferring to frame it, and saying he did not do it for the money. He later agreed to cash it with the promise of an engraved watch.

 

Another obstacle was that the proposed route crossed land controlled by the Blackfoot First Nation. This difficulty was overcome when a missionary priest, Albert Lacombe, persuaded the Blackfoot chief Crowfoot that construction of the railway was inevitable.

 

In return for his assent, Crowfoot was famously rewarded with a lifetime pass to ride the CPR. A more lasting consequence of the choice of route was that, unlike the one proposed by Fleming, the land surrounding the railway often proved too arid for successful agriculture. The CPR may have placed too much reliance on a report from naturalist John Macoun, who had crossed the prairies at a time of very high rainfall and had reported that the area was fertile.

 

The greatest disadvantage of the route was in Kicking Horse Pass. In the first 6 km (3.7 miles) west of the 1,625 metre (5,330 ft) high summit, the Kicking Horse River drops 350 metres (1,150 ft). The steep drop would force the cash-strapped CPR to build a 7 km (4.5 mile) long stretch of track with a very steep 4.5% gradient once it reached the pass in 1884. This was over four times the maximum gradient recommended for railways of this era, and even modern railways rarely exceed a 2% gradient. However, this route was far more direct than one through the Yellowhead Pass, and saved hours for both passengers and freight. This section of track was the CPR's Big Hill. Safety switches were installed at several points, the speed limit for descending trains was set at 10 km per hour (6 mph), and special locomotives were ordered. Despite these measures, several serious runaways still occurred. CPR officials insisted that this was a temporary expediency, but this state of affairs would last for 25 years until the completion of the Spiral Tunnels in the early 20th century.

 

In 1881 construction progressed at a pace too slow for the railway's officials, who in 1882 hired the renowned railway executive William Cornelius Van Horne, to oversee construction with the inducement of a generous salary and the intriguing challenge of handling such a difficult railway project. Van Horne stated that he would have 800 km (500 miles) of main line built in 1882. Floods delayed the start of the construction season, but over 672 km (417 miles) of main line, as well as various sidings and branch lines, were built that year. The Thunder Bay branch (west from Fort William) was completed in June 1882 by the Department of Railways and Canals and turned over to the company in May 1883, permitting all-Canadian lake and rail traffic from eastern Canada to Winnipeg for the first time in Canada's history. By the end of 1883, the railway had reached the Rocky Mountains, just eight km (5 miles) east of Kicking Horse Pass. The construction seasons of 1884 and 1885 would be spent in the mountains of British Columbia and on the north shore of Lake Superior.

 

Many thousands of navvies worked on the railway. Many were European immigrants. In British Columbia, the CPR hired workers from China, nicknamed coolies. A navvy received between $1 and $2.50 per day, but had to pay for his own food, clothing, transportation to the job site, mail, and medical care. After two and a half months of back-breaking labour, they could net as little as $16. Chinese navvies in British Columbia made only between $0.75 and $1.25 a day, not including expenses, leaving barely anything to send home. They did the most dangerous construction jobs, such as working with explosives. The families of the Chinese who were killed received no compensation, or even notification of loss of life. Many of the men who survived did not have enough money to return to their families in China. Many spent years in lonely, sad and often poor conditions. Yet the Chinese were hard working and played a key role in building the western stretch of the railway; even some boys as young as 12 years old served as tea-boys.

 

By 1883, railway construction was progressing rapidly, but the CPR was in danger of running out of funds. In response, on January 31, 1884, the government passed the Railway Relief Bill, providing a further $22,500,000 in loans to the CPR. The bill received royal assent on March 6, 1884.

 

In March 1885, the North-West Rebellion broke out in the District of Saskatchewan. Van Horne, in Ottawa at the time, suggested to the government that the CPR could transport troops to Qu'Appelle, Assiniboia, in eleven days. Some sections of track were incomplete or had not been used before, but the trip to Winnipeg was made in nine days and the rebellion was quickly put down. Perhaps because the government was grateful for this service, they subsequently re-organized the CPR's debt and provided a further $5,000,000 loan. This money was desperately needed by the CPR. On November 7, 1885 the Last Spike was driven at Craigellachie, British Columbia, making good on the original promise. Four days earlier, the last spike of the Lake Superior section was driven in just west of Jackfish, Ontario. While the railway was completed four years after the original 1881 deadline, it was completed more than five years ahead of the new date of 1891 that Macdonald gave in 1881.

 

The successful construction of such a massive project, although troubled by delays and scandal, was considered an impressive feat of engineering and political will for a country with such a small population, limited capital, and difficult terrain. It was by far the longest railway ever constructed at the time. It had taken 12,000 men, 5,000 horses, and 300 dog-sled teams to build the railway.

 

Meanwhile, in Eastern Canada, the CPR had created a network of lines reaching from Quebec City to St. Thomas, Ontario by 1885, and had launched a fleet of Great Lakes ships to link its terminals. The CPR had effected purchases and long-term leases of several railways through an associated railway company, the Ontario and Quebec Railway (O&Q). The O&Q built a line between Perth, Ontario, and Toronto (completed on May 5, 1884) to connect these acquisitions. The CPR obtained a 999-year lease on the O&Q on January 4, 1884. Later, in 1895, it acquired a minority interest in the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway, giving it a link to New York and the northeast US.

 

So many cost-cutting shortcuts were taken in constructing the railway that regular transcontinental service could not start for another seven months while work was done to improve the railway's condition. However, had these shortcuts not been taken, it is conceivable that the CPR might have had to default financially, leaving the railway unfinished. The first transcontinental passenger train departed from Montreal's Dalhousie Station, located at Berri Street and Notre Dame Street on June 28, 1886 at 8:00 p.m. and arrived at Port Moody on July 4, 1886 at noon. This train consisted of two baggage cars, a mail car, one second-class coach, two immigrant sleepers, two first-class coaches, two sleeping cars, and a diner.

 

By that time, however, the CPR had decided to move its western terminus from Port Moody to Gastown, which was renamed "Vancouver" later that year. The first official train destined for Vancouver arrived on May 23, 1887, although the line had already been in use for three months. The CPR quickly became profitable, and all loans from the Federal government were repaid years ahead of time.

 

In 1888, a branch line was opened between Sudbury and Sault Ste. Marie where the CPR connected with the American railway system and its own steamships. That same year, work was started on a line from London, Ontario to the American border at Windsor, Ontario. That line opened on June 12, 1890.

 

The CPR also leased the New Brunswick Railway for 999 years and built the International Railway of Maine, connecting Montreal with Saint John, New Brunswick in 1889. The connection with Saint John on the Atlantic coast made the CPR the first truly transcontinental railway company and permitted trans-Atlantic cargo and passenger services to continue year-round when sea ice in the Gulf of St. Lawrence closed the port of Montreal during the winter months.

 

By 1896, competition with the Great Northern Railway for traffic in southern British Columbia forced the CPR to construct a second line across the province, south of the original line. Van Horne, now president of the CPR, asked for government aid, and the government agreed to provide around $3.6 million to construct a railway from Lethbridge, Alberta through Crowsnest Pass to the south shore of Kootenay Lake, in exchange for the CPR agreeing to reduce freight rates in perpetuity for key commodities shipped in Western Canada. The controversial Crowsnest Pass Agreement effectively locked the eastbound rate on grain products and westbound rates on certain "settlers' effects" at the 1897 level. Although temporarily suspended during World War I, it was not until 1983 that the "Crow Rate" was permanently replaced by the Western Grain Transportation Act which allowed for the gradual increase of grain shipping prices. The Crowsnest Pass line opened on June 18, 1899.

 

Practically speaking, the CPR had built a railway that operated mostly in the wilderness. The usefulness of the Prairies was questionable in the minds of many. The thinking prevailed that the Prairies had great potential. Under the initial contract with the Canadian Government to build the railway, the CPR was granted 25,000,000 acres (100,000 km²). Proving already to be a very resourceful organization, Canadian Pacific began an intense campaign to bring immigrants to Canada.

 

Canadian Pacific agents operated in many overseas locations. Immigrants were often sold a package that included passage on a CP ship, travel on a CP train, and land sold by the CP railway. Land was priced at $2.50 an acre and up. Immigrants paid very little for a seven-day journey to the West. They rode in Colonist cars that had sleeping facilities and a small kitchen at one end of the car. Children were not allowed off the train, lest they wander off and be left behind. The directors of the CPR knew that not only were they creating a nation, but also a long-term source of revenue for their company.

 

During the first decade of the twentieth century, the CPR continued to build more lines. In 1908 the CPR opened a line connecting Toronto with Sudbury. Previously, westbound traffic originating in southern Ontario took a circuitous route through eastern Ontario.

Several operational improvements were also made to the railway in western Canada. In 1909 the CPR completed two significant engineering accomplishments. The most significant was the replacement of the Big Hill, which had become a major bottleneck in the CPR's main line, with the Spiral Tunnels, reducing the grade to 2.2% from 4.5%. The Spiral Tunnels opened in August. On November 3, 1909, the Lethbridge Viaduct over the Oldman River valley at Lethbridge, Alberta was opened. It is 1,624 metres (5,327 ft) long and, at its maximum, 96 metres (314 ft) high, making it the longest railway bridge in Canada. In 1916 the CPR replaced its line through Rogers Pass, which was prone to avalanches, with the Connaught Tunnel, an eight km (5 mile) long tunnel under Mount Macdonald that was, at the time of its opening, the longest railway tunnel in the Western Hemisphere.

 

The CPR acquired several smaller railways via long-term leases in 1912. On January 3, 1912, the CPR acquired the Dominion Atlantic Railway, a railway that ran in western Nova Scotia. This acquisition gave the CPR a connection to Halifax, a significant port on the Atlantic Ocean. The Dominion Atlantic was isolated from the rest of the CPR network and used the CNR to facilitate interchange; the DAR also operated ferry services across the Bay of Fundy for passengers and cargo (but not rail cars) from the port of Digby, Nova Scotia to the CPR at Saint John, New Brunswick. DAR steamships also provided connections for passengers and cargo between Yarmouth, Boston and New York.

 

On July 1, 1912, the CPR acquired the Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway, a railway on Vancouver Island that connected to the CPR using a railcar ferry. The CPR also acquired the Quebec Central Railway on December 14, 1912.

 

During the late 19th century, the railway undertook an ambitious program of hotel construction, building the Château Frontenac in Quebec City, the Royal York Hotel in Toronto, the Banff Springs Hotel, and several other major Canadian landmarks. By then, the CPR had competition from three other transcontinental lines, all of them money-losers. In 1919, these lines were consolidated, along with the track of the old Intercolonial Railway and its spurs, into the government-owned Canadian National Railways.

 

When World War I broke out in 1914, the CPR devoted resources to the war effort, and managed to stay profitable while its competitors struggled to remain solvent. After the war, the Federal government created Canadian National Railways (CNR, later CN) out of several bankrupt railways that fell into government hands during and after the war. CNR would become the main competitor to the CPR in Canada.

 

The Great Depression, which lasted from 1929 until 1939, hit many companies heavily. While the CPR was affected, it was not affected to the extent of its rival CNR because it, unlike the CNR, was debt-free. The CPR scaled back on some of its passenger and freight services, and stopped issuing dividends to its shareholders after 1932.

 

One highlight of the 1930s, both for the railway and for Canada, was the visit of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth to Canada in 1939, the first time that the reigning monarch had visited the country. The CPR and the CNR shared the honours of pulling the royal train across the country, with the CPR undertaking the westbound journey from Quebec City to Vancouver.

 

Later that year, World War II began. As it had done in World War I, the CPR devoted much of its resources to the war effort. It retooled its Angus Shops in Montreal to produce Valentine tanks, and transported troops and resources across the country. As well, 22 of the CPR's ships went to warfare, 12 of which were sunk.

 

After World War II, the transportation industry in Canada changed. Where railways had previously provided almost universal freight and passenger services, cars, trucks, and airplanes started to take traffic away from railways. This naturally helped the CPR's air and trucking operations, and the railway's freight operations continued to thrive hauling resource traffic and bulk commodities. However, passenger trains quickly became unprofitable.

 

During the 1950s, the railway introduced new innovations in passenger service, and in 1955 introduced The Canadian, a new luxury transcontinental train. However, starting in the 1960s the company started to pull out of passenger services, ending services on many of its branch lines. It also discontinued its transcontinental train The Dominion in 1966, and in 1970 unsuccessfully applied to discontinue The Canadian. For the next eight years, it continued to apply to discontinue the service, and service on The Canadian declined markedly. On October 29, 1978, CP Rail transferred its passenger services to VIA Rail, a new federal Crown corporation that is responsible for managing all intercity passenger service formerly handled by both CP Rail and CN. VIA eventually took almost all of its passenger trains, including The Canadian, off CP's lines.

 

In 1968, as part of a corporate re-organization, each of the CPR's major operations, including its rail operations, were organized as separate subsidiaries. The name of the railway was changed to CP Rail, and the parent company changed its name to Canadian Pacific Limited in 1971. Its express, telecommunications, hotel and real estate holdings were spun off, and ownership of all of the companies transferred to Canadian Pacific Investments. The company discarded its beaver logo, adopting the new Multimark logo that could be used for each of its operations.

 

In 1984 CP Rail commenced construction of the Mount Macdonald Tunnel to augment the Connaught Tunnel under the Selkirk Mountains. The first revenue train passed through the tunnel in 1988. At 14.7 km (9 miles), it is the longest tunnel in the Americas.

 

During the 1980s, the Soo Line, in which CP Rail still owned a controlling interest, underwent several changes. It acquired the Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway in 1982. Then on February 21, 1985, the Soo Line obtained a controlling interest in the Milwaukee Road, merging it into its system on January 1, 1986. Also in 1980 Canadian Pacific bought out the controlling interests of the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway (TH&B) from Conrail and molded it into the Canadian Pacific System, dissolving the TH&B's name from the books in 1985. In 1987 most of CPR's trackage in the Great Lakes region, including much of the original Soo Line, were spun off into a new railway, the Wisconsin Central, which was subsequently purchased by CN.

 

Influenced by the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement of 1989 which liberalized trade between the two nations, the CPR's expansion continued during the early 1990s: CP Rail gained full control of the Soo Line in 1990, and bought the Delaware and Hudson Railway in 1991. These two acquisitions gave CP Rail routes to the major American cities of Chicago (via the Soo Line) and New York City (via the D&H).

 

During the next few years CP Rail downsized its route, and several Canadian branch lines were either sold to short lines or abandoned. This included all of its lines east of Montreal, with the routes operating across Maine and New Brunswick to the port of Saint John (operating as the Canadian Atlantic Railway) being sold or abandoned, severing CPR's transcontinental status (in Canada); the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in the late 1950s, coupled with subsidized icebreaking services, made Saint John surplus to CPR's requirements. During the 1990s, both CP Rail and CN attempted unsuccessfully to buy out the eastern assets of the other, so as to permit further rationalization. As well, it closed divisional and regional offices, drastically reduced white collar staff, and consolidated its Canadian traffic control system in Calgary, Alberta.

 

Finally, in 1996, reflecting the increased importance of western traffic to the railway, CP Rail moved its head office to Calgary from Montreal and changed its name back to Canadian Pacific Railway. A new subsidiary company, the St. Lawrence and Hudson Railway, was created to operate its money-losing lines in eastern North America, covering Quebec, Southern and Eastern Ontario, trackage rights to Chicago, Illinois, as well as the Delaware and Hudson Railway in the U.S. Northeast. However, the new subsidiary, threatened with being sold off and free to innovate, quickly spun off losing track to short lines, instituted scheduled freight service, and produced an unexpected turn-around in profitability. After only four years, CPR revised its opinion and the StL&H formally re-amalgamated with its parent on January 1, 2001.

 

In 2001, the CPR's parent company, Canadian Pacific Limited, spun off its five subsidiaries, including the CPR, into independent companies. Canadian Pacific Railway formally (but, not legally) shortened its name to Canadian Pacific in early 2007, dropping the word "railway" in order to reflect more operational flexibility. Shortly after the name revision, Canadian Pacific announced that it had committed to becoming a major sponsor and logistics provider to the 2010 Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver, British Columbia.

 

On September 4, 2007, CPR announced it was acquiring the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad from its present owners, London-based Electra Private Equity.[3] The transaction is an "end-to-end" consolidation,[4][5] and will give CPR access to U.S. shippers of agricultural products, ethanol, and coal. CPR has stated its intention to use this purchase to gain access to the rich coal fields of Wyoming's Powder River Basin. The purchase price is US$1.48 billion, and future payments of over US$1.0 billion contingent on commencement of construction on the smaller railroad's Powder River extension and specified volumes of coal shipments from the Powder River basin.[4] The transaction was subject to approval of the U.S. Surface Transportation Board (STB), which was expected to take a year.[4] On October 4, 2007, CPR announced it has completed the financial transactions required for the acquisition, placing the DM&E and IC&E in a voting trust with Richard Hamlin appointed as the trustee. CPR planned to integrate the railroads' operations once the STB approves the acquisition.[6] The merger was completed as of October 31, 2008.[7]

 

Post Processing;

Topaz: vibrance

PhotoShop Elements 5: crop, multiply, posterization, ink outlines, sandstone texture

The waterway control system at Le Barre, Bayonne is impressive and I have been photographing it for some years.

I have described it briefly here : flic.kr/p/nNkU9F

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

Merry Christmas!

 

LIVE -- LOVE -- LAUGH

 

And may God help/forgive us.

Boeing E-3A Sentry.

 

AWACS: Airborne Warning And Control System.

 

For further (technical) information see previous picture.

 

Location: NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen.

Province: Limburg.

Country: Germany.

 

Please press "L" to see large picture.

552nd ACW Bids Farewell to First AWACS

The right side nose landing gear door of E-3 Sentry #75-0560 bears the names of current and former 552nd Air Control Wing members after a divestment signing event at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, March 31, 2023. This E-3 Sentry is the first aircraft to be divested. -USAF

 

DMAFB

Aircraft 0560 is the first E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning Air Control System aircraft to retire from the fleet this year. As part of the FY23 President’s Budget Request, the Department of the Air Force announced its intent to divest 13 E-3 AWACS aircraft and redirect funding to procure and field a replacement.

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

Airmen assigned to the 95th Aircraft Maintenance Unit, Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., launch Lockheed Martin F-22 "Raptor" aircraft during exercise Combat Archer at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, Aug. 18, 2016.

  

HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah -- Military exercises Combat Hammer and Combat Archer ended August 18 at Hill AFB and the Utah Test and Training Range.

 

During the exercises, Total Force Initiative Airmen assigned to the active-duty 95th and AF Reserve 301st Fighter Squadrons from Tyndall AFB, Fla. tested their ability to build, load, launch and employ munitions, which were dropped and fired from Tyndall Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor aircraft.

 

“Our Airmen gain a tremendous opportunity to prepare for future combat operations in the F-22 by performing in these exercises,” said Lt. Col. Daniel Lehoski, 95th Fighter Squadron detachment commander. “It builds confidence in our team, aircraft, and munitions through a mission-focused effort.”

 

The air-to-ground and air-to-air exercises are conducted by the 83rd and 86th Fighter Weapons Squadrons here. Their purpose is to collect and analyze data on the performance of precision weapons, and to measure their suitability for use in combat.

 

During the exercises, Lehoski noted that Tyndall F-22s dropped 32 precision guided munitions, employed 14 air-to-air missiles, and validated AIM-9X missile employment procedures, a first for Tyndall F-22s. Operations Airmen also flew integration missions with F-35, F-16, and F-15E aircraft, enhancing their ability to provide air dominance for America.

 

“We are tremendously appreciative of the support we have received from Hill AFB and both the 86th and 83rd FWS for giving the Airmen of Team Tyndall the opportunity to train at Combat Hammer and Combat Archer,” said Lehoski.

 

Airmen and aircraft, including A-10s from Moody AFB, Ga., F-15Es from Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, and F-16s from Shaw AFB, S.C., also participated during the past two weeks.

  

A U.S. Air Force Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor flies above Royal Australian Air Force Base Tindal, Australia, March 2, 2017. Twelve Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors and approximately 200 U.S. Air Force Airmen participated in the first Enhanced Air Cooperation, an initiative under the Force Posture Agreement between the U.S. and Australia.

  

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The Lockheed Martin F-22 "Raptor" is a fifth-generation, single-seat, twin-engine, all-weather stealth tactical fighter aircraft developed for the United States Air Force (USAF). The result of the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program, the aircraft was designed primarily as an air superiority fighter, but also has ground attack, electronic warfare, and signal intelligence capabilities. The prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, built most of the F-22's airframe and weapons systems and conducted final assembly, while Boeing provided the wings, aft fuselage, avionics integration, and training systems.

 

The aircraft was variously designated F-22 and F/A-22 before it formally entered service in December 2005 as the F-22A. Despite its protracted development and various operational issues, USAF officials consider the F-22 a critical component of the service's tactical air power. Its combination of stealth, aerodynamic performance, and situational awareness enable unprecedented air combat capabilities.

 

Service officials had originally planned to buy a total of 750 ATFs. In 2009, the program was cut to 187 operational production aircraft due to high costs, a lack of clear air-to-air missions due to delays in Russian and Chinese fighter programs, a ban on exports, and development of the more versatile F-35. The last F-22 was delivered in 2012.

  

Development

 

Origins

 

In 1981, the U.S. Air Force identified a requirement for an Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) to replace the F-15 "Eagle" and F-16 "Fighting Falcon". Code named "Senior Sky", this air-superiority fighter program was influenced by emerging worldwide threats, including new developments in Soviet air defense systems and the proliferation of the Su-27 "Flanker"- and MiG-29 "Fulcrum"-class of fighter aircraft. It would take advantage of the new technologies in fighter design on the horizon, including composite materials, lightweight alloys, advanced flight control systems, more powerful propulsion systems, and most importantly, stealth technology. In 1983, the ATF concept development team became the System Program Office (SPO) and managed the program at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The demonstration and validation (Dem/Val) request for proposals (RFP) was issued in September 1985, with requirements placing strong emphasis on stealth and supercruise. Of the seven bidding companies, Lockheed and Northrop were selected on 31 October 1986. Lockheed teamed with Boeing and General Dynamics while Northrop teamed with McDonnell Douglas, and the two contractor teams undertook a 50-month Dem/Val phase, culminating in the flight test of two technology demonstrator prototypes, the YF-22 and the YF-23, respectively.

 

Dem/Val was focused on risk reduction and technology development plans over specific aircraft designs. Contractors made extensive use of analytical and empirical methods, including computational fluid dynamics, wind-tunnel testing, and radar cross-section calculations and pole testing; the Lockheed team would conduct nearly 18,000 hours of wind-tunnel testing. Avionics development was marked by extensive testing and prototyping and supported by ground and flying laboratories. During Dem/Val, the SPO used the results of performance and cost trade studies conducted by contractor teams to adjust ATF requirements and delete ones that were significant weight and cost drivers while having marginal value. The short takeoff and landing (STOL) requirement was relaxed in order to delete thrust-reversers, saving substantial weight. As avionics was a major cost driver, side-looking radars were deleted, and the dedicated infra-red search and track (IRST) system was downgraded from multi-color to single color and then deleted as well. However, space and cooling provisions were retained to allow for future addition of these components. The ejection seat requirement was downgraded from a fresh design to the existing McDonnell Douglas ACES II. Despite efforts by the contractor teams to rein in weight, the takeoff gross weight estimate was increased from 50,000 lb (22,700 kg) to 60,000 lb (27,200 kg), resulting in engine thrust requirement increasing from 30,000 lbf (133 kN) to 35,000 lbf (156 kN) class.

 

Each team produced two prototype air vehicles for Dem/Val, one for each of the two engine options. The YF-22 had its maiden flight on 29 September 1990 and in flight tests achieved up to Mach 1.58 in supercruise. After the Dem/Val flight test of the prototypes, on 23 April 1991, Secretary of the USAF Donald Rice announced the Lockheed team as the winner of the ATF competition. The YF-23 design was considered stealthier and faster, while the YF-22, with its thrust vectoring nozzles, was more maneuverable as well as less expensive and risky. The aviation press speculated that the Lockheed team's design was also more adaptable to the U.S. Navy's Navalized Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF), but by 1992, the Navy had abandoned NATF.

  

Production and procurement

 

As the program moved to full-scale development, or the Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) stage, the production version had notable differences from the YF-22, despite having a broadly similar shape. The swept-back angle of the leading edge was decreased from 48° to 42°, while the vertical stabilizers were shifted rearward and decreased in area by 20%. To improve pilot visibility, the canopy was moved forward 7 inches (18 cm), and the engine intakes moved rearward 14 inches (36 cm). The shapes of the wing and stabilator trailing edges were refined to improve aerodynamics, strength, and stealth characteristics. Increasing weight during development caused slight reductions in range and maneuver performance.

 

Prime contractor Lockheed Martin Aeronautics manufactured the majority of the airframe and performed final assembly at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia; program partner Boeing Defense, Space & Security provided additional airframe components as well as avionics integration and training systems. The first F-22, an EMD aircraft with tail number 4001, was unveiled at Marietta, Georgia, on 9 April 1997, and first flew on 7 September 1997. Production, with the first lot awarded in September 2000, supported over 1,000 subcontractors and suppliers from 46 states and up to 95,000 jobs, and spanned 15 years at a peak rate of roughly two airplanes per month. In 2006, the F-22 development team won the Collier Trophy, American aviation's most prestigious award. Due to the aircraft's advanced nature, contractors have been targeted by cyberattacks and technology theft.

 

The USAF originally envisioned ordering 750 ATFs at a total program cost of $44.3 billion and procurement cost of $26.2 billion in fiscal year (FY) 1985 dollars, with production beginning in 1994. The 1990 Major Aircraft Review led by Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney reduced this to 648 aircraft beginning in 1996. By 1997, funding instability had further cut the total to 339, which was again reduced to 277 by 2003. In 2004, the Department of Defense (DoD) further reduced this to 183 operational aircraft, despite the USAF's preference for 381. A multi-year procurement plan was implemented in 2006 to save $15 billion, with total program cost projected to be $62 billion for 183 F-22s distributed to seven combat squadrons. In 2008, Congress passed a defense spending bill that raised the total orders for production aircraft to 187.

 

The first two F-22s built were EMD aircraft in the Block 1.0 configuration for initial flight testing, while the third was a Block 2.0 aircraft built to represent the internal structure of production airframes and enabled it to test full flight loads. Six more EMD aircraft were built in the Block 10 configuration for development and upgrade testing, with the last two considered essentially production quality jets. Production for operational squadrons consisted of 37 Block 20 training aircraft and 149 Block 30/35 combat aircraft; one of the Block 35 aircraft is dedicated to flight sciences at Edwards Air Force Base.

 

The numerous new technologies in the F-22 resulted in substantial cost overruns and delays. Many capabilities were deferred to post-service upgrades, reducing the initial cost but increasing total program cost. As production wound down in 2011, the total program cost is estimated to be about $67.3 billion, with $32.4 billion spent on Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and $34.9 billion on procurement and military construction (MILCON) in then year dollars. The incremental cost for an additional F-22 was estimated at about $138 million in 2009.

 

Ban on exports

 

The F-22 cannot be exported under US federal law to protect its stealth technology and other high-tech features. Customers for U.S. fighters are acquiring earlier designs such as the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon or the newer F-35 Lightning II, which contains technology from the F-22 but was designed to be cheaper, more flexible, and available for export. In September 2006, Congress upheld the ban on foreign F-22 sales. Despite the ban, the 2010 defense authorization bill included provisions requiring the DoD to prepare a report on the costs and feasibility for an F-22 export variant, and another report on the effect of F-22 export sales on U.S. aerospace industry.

 

Some Australian politicians and defense commentators proposed that Australia should attempt to purchase F-22s instead of the planned F-35s, citing the F-22's known capabilities and F-35's delays and developmental uncertainties. However, the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) determined that the F-22 was unable to perform the F-35's strike and close air support roles. The Japanese government also showed interest in the F-22 for its Replacement-Fighter program. The Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) would reportedly require fewer fighters for its mission if it obtained the F-22, thus reducing engineering and staffing costs. However, in 2009 it was reported that acquiring the F-22 would require increases to the Japanese government's defense budget beyond the historical 1 percent of its GDP. With the end of F-22 production, Japan chose the F-35 in December 2011. Israel also expressed interest, but eventually chose the F-35 because of the F-22's price and unavailability.

 

Production termination

 

Throughout the 2000s, the need for F-22s was debated, due to rising costs and the lack of relevant adversaries. In 2006, Comptroller General of the United States David Walker found that "the DoD has not demonstrated the need" for more investment in the F-22, and further opposition to the program was expressed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon R. England, Senator John McCain, and Chairman of U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services Senator John Warner. The F-22 program lost influential supporters in 2008 after the forced resignations of Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force General T. Michael Moseley.

 

In November 2008, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated that the F-22 was not relevant in post-Cold War conflicts such as irregular warfare operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in April 2009, under the new Obama Administration, he called for ending production in FY2011, leaving the USAF with 187 production aircraft. In July, General James Cartwright, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated to the Senate Committee on Armed Services his reasons for supporting termination of F-22 production. They included shifting resources to the multirole F-35 to allow proliferation of fifth-generation fighters for three service branches and preserving the F/A-18 production line to maintain the military's electronic warfare (EW) capabilities in the Boeing EA-18G Growler.[60] Issues with the F-22's reliability and availability also raised concerns. After President Obama threatened to veto further production, the Senate voted in July 2009 in favor of ending production and the House subsequently agreed to abide by the 187 production aircraft cap. Gates stated that the decision was taken in light of the F-35's capabilities, and in 2010, he set the F-22 requirement to 187 aircraft by lowering the number of major regional conflict preparations from two to one.

 

In 2010, USAF initiated a study to determine the costs of retaining F-22 tooling for a future Service Life Extension Program (SLEP).[66] A RAND Corporation paper from this study estimated that restarting production and building an additional 75 F-22s would cost $17 billion, resulting in $227 million per aircraft, or $54 million higher than the flyaway cost. Lockheed Martin stated that restarting the production line itself would cost about $200 million. Production tooling and associated documentation were subsequently stored at the Sierra Army Depot, allowing the retained tooling to support the fleet life cycle. There were reports that attempts to retrieve this tooling found empty containers, but a subsequent audit found that the tooling was stored as expected.

 

Russian and Chinese fighter developments have fueled concern, and in 2009, General John Corley, head of Air Combat Command, stated that a fleet of 187 F-22s would be inadequate, but Secretary Gates dismissed General Corley's concern. In 2011, Gates explained that Chinese fifth-generation fighter developments had been accounted for when the number of F-22s was set, and that the U.S. would have a considerable advantage in stealth aircraft in 2025, even with F-35 delays. In December 2011, the 195th and final F-22 was completed out of 8 test EMD and 187 operational aircraft produced; the aircraft was delivered to the USAF on 2 May 2012.

 

In April 2016, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee proposed legislation that would direct the Air Force to conduct a cost study and assessment associated with resuming production of the F-22. Since the production halt directed in 2009 by then Defense Secretary Gates, lawmakers and the Pentagon noted that air warfare systems of Russia and China were catching up to those of the U.S. Lockheed Martin has proposed upgrading the Block 20 training aircraft into combat-coded Block 30/35 versions as a way to increase numbers available for deployment. On 9 June 2017, the Air Force submitted their report to Congress stating they had no plans to restart the F-22 production line due to economic and operational issues; it estimated it would cost approximately $50 billion to procure 194 additional F-22s at a cost of $206–$216 million per aircraft, including approximately $9.9 billion for non-recurring start-up costs and $40.4 billion for aircraft procurement costs.

 

Upgrades

 

The first aircraft with combat-capable Block 3.0 software flew in 2001. Increment 2, the first upgrade program, was implemented in 2005 for Block 20 aircraft onward and enabled the employment of Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM). Certification of the improved AN/APG-77(V)1 radar was completed in March 2007, and airframes from production Lot 5 onward are fitted with this radar, which incorporates air-to-ground modes. Increment 3.1 for Block 30 aircraft onward provided improved ground-attack capability through synthetic aperture radar mapping and radio emitter direction finding, electronic attack and Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) integration; testing began in 2009 and the first upgraded aircraft was delivered in 2011. To address oxygen deprivation issues, F-22s were fitted with an automatic backup oxygen system (ABOS) and modified life support system starting in 2012.

 

Increment 3.2 for Block 35 aircraft is a two-part upgrade process; 3.2A focuses on electronic warfare, communications and identification, while 3.2B includes geolocation improvements and a new stores management system to show the correct symbols for the AIM-9X and AIM-120D.[83][84] To enable two-way communication with other platforms, the F-22 can use the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) as a gateway. The planned Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) integration was cut due to development delays and lack of proliferation among USAF platforms. The F-22 fleet is planned to start receiving Increment 3.2B as well as a software upgrade for cryptography capabilities and avionics stability in May 2019. A Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Joint (MIDS-J) radio that replaces the current Link-16 receive-only box is expected to be operational by 2020. Subsequent upgrades are also focusing on having an open architecture to enable faster future enhancements.

 

In 2024, funding is projected to begin for the F-22 mid-life upgrade (MLU), which is expected to include new sensors and antennas, hardware refresh, cockpit improvements, and a helmet mounted display and cuing system. Other enhancements being developed include IRST functionality for the AN/AAR-56 Missile Launch Detector (MLD) and more durable stealth coating based on the F-35's.

 

The F-22 was designed for a service life of 8,000 flight hours, with a $350 million "structures retrofit program". Investigations are being made for upgrades to extend their useful lives further. In the long term, the F-22 is expected to be superseded by a sixth-generation jet fighter to be fielded in the 2030s.

  

Design

 

Overview

 

The F-22 Raptor is a fifth-generation fighter that is considered fourth generation in stealth aircraft technology by the USAF.[91] It is the first operational aircraft to combine supercruise, supermaneuverability, stealth, and sensor fusion in a single weapons platform. The F-22 has four empennage surfaces, retractable tricycle landing gear, and clipped delta wings with reverse trailing edge sweep and leading edge extensions running to the upper outboard corner of the inlets. Flight control surfaces include leading-edge flaps, flaperons, ailerons, rudders on the canted vertical stabilizers, and all-moving horizontal tails (stabilators); for speed brake function, the ailerons deflect up, flaperons down, and rudders outwards to increase drag.

 

The aircraft's dual Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 augmented turbofan engines are closely spaced and incorporate pitch-axis thrust vectoring nozzles with a range of ±20 degrees; each engine has maximum thrust in the 35,000 lbf (156 kN) class. The F-22's thrust-to-weight ratio at typical combat weight is nearly at unity in maximum military power and 1.25 in full afterburner. Maximum speed without external stores is approximately Mach 1.8 at military power and greater than Mach 2 with afterburners.

 

The F-22's high cruise speed and operating altitude over prior fighters improve the effectiveness of its sensors and weapon systems, and increase survivability against ground defenses such as surface-to-air missiles. The aircraft is among only a few that can supercruise, or sustain supersonic flight without using fuel-inefficient afterburners; it can intercept targets which subsonic aircraft would lack the speed to pursue and an afterburner-dependent aircraft would lack the fuel to reach. The F-22's thrust and aerodynamics enable regular combat speeds of Mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet (15,000 m). The use of internal weapons bays permits the aircraft to maintain comparatively higher performance over most other combat-configured fighters due to a lack of aerodynamic drag from external stores. The aircraft's structure contains a significant amount of high-strength materials to withstand stress and heat of sustained supersonic flight. Respectively, titanium alloys and composites comprise 39% and 24% of the structural weight.

 

The F-22's aerodynamics, relaxed stability, and powerful thrust-vectoring engines give it excellent maneuverability and energy potential across its flight envelope. The airplane has excellent high alpha (angle of attack) characteristics, capable of flying at trimmed alpha of over 60° while maintaining roll control and performing maneuvers such as the Herbst maneuver (J-turn) and Pugachev's Cobra. The flight control system and full-authority digital engine control (FADEC) make the aircraft highly departure resistant and controllable, thus giving the pilot carefree handling.

  

Stealth

 

The F-22 was designed to be highly difficult to detect and track by radar. Measures to reduce radar cross-section (RCS) include airframe shaping such as alignment of edges, fixed-geometry serpentine inlets and curved vanes that prevent line-of-sight of the engine faces and turbines from any exterior view, use of radar-absorbent material (RAM), and attention to detail such as hinges and pilot helmets that could provide a radar return. The F-22 was also designed to have decreased radio emissions, infrared signature and acoustic signature as well as reduced visibility to the naked eye. The aircraft's flat thrust-vectoring nozzles reduce infrared emissions of the exhaust plume to mitigate the threat of infrared homing ("heat seeking") surface-to-air or air-to-air missiles. Additional measures to reduce the infrared signature include special topcoat and active cooling of leading edges to manage the heat buildup from supersonic flight.

 

Compared to previous stealth designs like the F-117, the F-22 is less reliant on RAM, which are maintenance-intensive and susceptible to adverse weather conditions. Unlike the B-2, which requires climate-controlled hangars, the F-22 can undergo repairs on the flight line or in a normal hangar. The F-22 has a Signature Assessment System which delivers warnings when the radar signature is degraded and necessitates repair. While the F-22's exact RCS is classified, in 2009 Lockheed Martin released information indicating that from certain angles the aircraft has an RCS of 0.0001 m² or −40 dBsm – equivalent to the radar reflection of a "steel marble". Effectively maintaining the stealth features can decrease the F-22's mission capable rate to 62–70%.

 

The effectiveness of the stealth characteristics is difficult to gauge. The RCS value is a restrictive measurement of the aircraft's frontal or side area from the perspective of a static radar. When an aircraft maneuvers it exposes a completely different set of angles and surface area, potentially increasing radar observability. Furthermore, the F-22's stealth contouring and radar absorbent materials are chiefly effective against high-frequency radars, usually found on other aircraft. The effects of Rayleigh scattering and resonance mean that low-frequency radars such as weather radars and early-warning radars are more likely to detect the F-22 due to its physical size. However, such radars are also conspicuous, susceptible to clutter, and have low precision. Additionally, while faint or fleeting radar contacts make defenders aware that a stealth aircraft is present, reliably vectoring interception to attack the aircraft is much more challenging. According to the USAF an F-22 surprised an Iranian F-4 Phantom II that was attempting to intercept an American UAV, despite Iran's assertion of having military VHF radar coverage over the Persian Gulf.

 

.................................................................................................

 

Before getting into A, B, and C differences for the F-35, a short primer on how to tell an F-35 from an F-22 may help avoid an even larger fighter faux pas. After all, the F-22 and F-35 look similar as well, especially from certain angles and at a distance. Both the F-22 and F-35 have two intakes, two tails, and similar planforms.

 

If the two aircraft happen to be parked together, the F-22, however, is noticeably larger. The Raptor is about ten feet longer than a Lightning II. Its wingspan is about ten feet wider than an F-35A’s and F-35B’s, and roughly the same as an F-35C’s.

 

From behind, the twin, rectangular thrust-vectoring exhaust nozzles on the F-22 are an obvious difference. The F-35 has one round exhaust nozzle for its single engine. The geometry of the engine intakes distinguishes the two aircraft from the top and side. The Raptor’s intakes angle back. On the Lightning II, they point forward. Intake differences are visible from the front view as well. Opposing sides of the F-22’s intakes are parallel. The corners are slightly rounded. The F-35’s intake angles are sharper. A space between the intake and the fuselage, called a diverter, is found only on the Raptor as well. The F-35’s diverterless intake sits flush to the fuselage.

 

The single- vs. twin-engine difference plays out on the top sides of the two aircraft as well. The F-22 has two humps between the tails. The F-35 has just one. On the underside, the F-22 is much flatter with one main (though split) weapon bay with two doors. The F-35 is more rounded and has two distinct main weapon bays each with two doors. Taxiing, the F-22 sits about a foot lower than an F-35.

 

Context also matters. If the airplane in question is operating from an aircraft carrier, landing vertically, taking off in a very short distance, or displaying non-USAF markings, it’s not an F-22.

 

Context And The F-35 Variants

 

When it comes to distinguishing among F-35 variants, context can provide some tips as well. If the F-35 in question is being catapulted from a carrier, it’s an F-35C. If it’s landing vertically, it’s an F-35B. If it has Royal Air Force markings, it’s an F-35B. If it has international markings that aren’t associated with the RAF, it’s an F-35A (at least until another international air force procures B or C models).

 

Basic A, B, & C Differences

 

The A model is most easily distinguished from other F-35 models by the blister on the upper left side for its internal GAU-22/A Gatling-type gun. (B and C models do not have internal guns.) Like the B model, the F-35A has a smaller wing. The A model is the only F-35 variant with a refueling receptacle on its dorsal spine. The receptacle markings are clearly visible from the top view.

 

The B model is most easily distinguished from other F-35 models by its vertical lift system. The system comes into play at almost every viewing angle of the aircraft. Even in up-and-away (non vertical) flight, the F-35B has visual clues for the vertical lift system. The lift fan door flattens the upper surface of the F-35 just behind the cockpit, giving this model a distinctive hump. The hump is especially noticeable from front and side perspectives. The lift fan itself abbreviates the aft end of the canopy line as well.

 

Panel lines and markings are associated with the lift system are visible on the top and bottom sides of the F-35B. From above, panel lines for the lift fan door and the auxiliary air inlet are visible. From below, the doors for lift fan exhaust appear just behind the front landing gear doors. The aft end of the lower fuselage also has a seam for the doors that open when the three-bearing swivel duct goes into action in STOVL mode. (The A and C models have a hump in this location where their arresting/barricade tailhooks are stored.) The B model also has a diamond-shaped roll duct on the underside of each wing.

 

The C model is most easily distinguished from other F-35 models by its larger wing, which provides almost fifty percent more wing area than the A and B models. The hinge line for the wing fold is visible from top and bottom views. The F-35C wing has an additional control surfaces, called ailerons, on the trailing edge as well (two control surfaces on each wing instead of one). The inner control surfaces on the F-35C wing and the ones on the A and B are called flaperons. The landing gear on the F-35C is noticeable beefier. The nose gear has two tires and a launch bar that extends forward and upward from the wheels.

 

Another Trick: Markings

 

Markings can also be used to distinguish F-35 variants. US Air Force markings equate to the A model. US Marines to the B or C model. (The Marine Corps is purchasing eighty C models.) And US Navy to the C model only. The Air Force puts the aircraft identification number, or serial number, on the tail (F-35A). The US Marines and Navy put their identification numbers, called Bureau numbers, on the empennage just below the horizontal tails. To make identification somewhat easier, the F-35 variant designation appears just above the bureau number for the US Marine Corps and Navy. Unfortunately, because of their location these markings are not apparent in most photos. International operators have their own specific requirements for markings.

 

Other Notes

 

As noted in a previous Code One article, Norwegian F-35s will be distinguishable by a small, aerodynamically clean bump on the upper fuselage between the two vertical tails. The bump contains a dragchute.

 

Nosebooms are peculiar to flight test F-35s dedicated to flight sciences testing.

 

The major differences between the X-35 demonstrator aircraft, which are no longer flying, and F-35 were covered in another previous Code One article.

 

Basic Cheat Sheet

 

The F-35A has a small wing, full canopy, gun blister on the left upper side, and aerial refueling receptacle markings on its dorsal. It has no panel lines or markings associated with a STOVL lift system.

 

The F-35B has a small wing, distinctive fuselage hump and abbreviated canopy (thanks to the lift fan), refueling probe on the right side, and numerous markings, panel lines, and actual hardware associated with its vertical lift system.

 

The F-35C has the big wing, wing folds, ailerons, full canopy, refueling probe on the right side, and a launch bar and two tires on the front landing gear. If the aircraft has Navy markings, it’s an F-35C.

  

Weaving through a building line of thunderstorms in the Mighty and Awesome -8.

 

DHC-8-100/200

 

Details

Country of Origin

Canada

Type

Turboprop regional airliner

History

Bombardier's de Havilland Dash 8 has proven to be a popular player in the regional turboprop airliner market. De Havilland Canada began development of the Dash 8 in the late 1970s in response to what it saw as a considerable market demand for a new generation 30 to 40 seat commuter airliner. The first flight of the first of two preproduction aircraft was on June 20 1983, while Canadian certification was awarded on September 28 1984. The first customer delivery was to norOntair of Canada on October 23 1984. Like the Dash 7, the Dash 8 features a high mounted wing and Ttail, and has an advanced flight control system and large full length trailing edge flaps. Power meanwhile is supplied by two Pratt & Whitney Canada PW120 series (originally designated PT7A) turboprops. Initial Dash 8 production was of the Series 100, which was followed by the Series 100A in 1990. The 100A introduced a revised interior with extra headroom and PW120A turboprops. The Series 100B was offered from 1992 with more powerful PW121s for better climb and airfield performance. Production since switched to the improved performance Dash 8-200. Announced in 1992 and delivered from April 1995 the -200 features more powerful PW123C engines which give a 56km/h (30kt) increase in cruising speed, as well as greater commonality with the stretched Dash 8300. The 200B derivative has PW123Bs for better hot and high performance. From the second quarter of 1996 all Dash 8s delivered have been fitted with a computer controlled noise and vibration suppression system (or NVS). To reflect this the designation was changed to Dash 8Q (Q for `quiet'). In 1998 that was changed again to Dash 8 Q200 when a new interior was introduced.

Powerplants

100 - Two 1490kW (2000shp) Pratt & Whitney Canada PW120A turboprops driving four blade constant speed Hamilton Standard propellers. 100B - Two 1605kW (2150shp) PW121As. 200 - Two 1605kW (2150shp) PW123Cs in 200A, or two PW123Ds in 200B.

Performance

100A - Max cruising speed 490km/h (265kt), long range cruising speed 440km/h (237kt). Initial rate of climb 1560ft/min. Range with full passenger load, fuel and reserves 1520km (820nm), range with a 2720kg (6000lb) payload 2040km (1100nm). 100B - Same except max cruising speed of 500km/h (270kt). 200A & 200B - Same except max cruising speed 546km/h (295kt). Initial rate of climb 1475ft/min. Range with 37 passengers 1795km (970nm).

Weights

100A - Operating empty 10,250kg (22,600lb), max takeoff 15,650kg (34,500lb). 100B - Operating empty 10,273kg (22,648lb), max takeoff 16,465kg (36,300lb). 200A & 200B - Operating empty 10,434kg (23,004lb), max takeoff 16,465kg (36,300lb).

Dimensions

Wing span 25.91m (85ft 0in), length 22.25m (73ft 0in), height 7.49m (24ft 7in). Wing area 54.4m2 (585.0sq ft).

Capacity

Flightcrew of two. Typical passenger seating for 37 at four abreast and 79cm (31in) pitch, max seating for 40.

Production

347 Dash 8-100s/-200s in service or on order at late 1998.

 

Source: www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/de-havilland-canada-dhc-8...

  

DHC-8-300

 

Details

Country of Origin

Canada

Type

Turboprop regional airliner

History

With the success of the Dash 8-100 series, a stretched version with greater capacity was a logical development. De Havilland Canada (now part of Bombardier) launched full scale development of a 50 seat stretched version of its Dash 8 regional airliner during 1986, approximately two years after the standard fuselage length aircraft had entered service. The first series 300 aircraft was in fact the prototype Dash 8 converted to the new length, and it flew for the first time in its new configuration on May 15 1987. Flight testing culminated in the awarding of Canadian certification in February 1989, with the first delivery to Time Air following late that same month. US certification was awarded in June 1989. The stretch comprises fuselage plugs forward and aft of the wing, increasing length by 3.43m (11ft 3in). In addition, the wings are greater in span. The fuselage stretch increases typical seating capacity to 50 (at 81cm/32in pitch), or for up to 56 (at 74cm/29in pitch). Other changes compared with the Dash 8-100 were minor, but included a larger, repositioned galley, larger toilet, additional wardrobe, dual air conditioning packs, a new galley service door and optional APU. The Dash 8-300 has been offered in a number of variants. The standard 300 was followed in 1990 by the 300A which introduced optional higher gross weights, interior improvements (as on the Dash 8-100A), and standard PW123A engines (with PW123Bs optional). The 300B was introduced in 1992 and has 1865kW (2500shp) PW123Bs as standard, as is the optional high gross weight of the 300A. The 300E has 1775kW (2380shp) PW123Es rated to 40 degrees, thus improving hot and high performance. Like the Dash 8Q-200, all Dash 8-300s built since the second quarter of 1996 have been fitted with a computer controlled noise and vibration suppression system (or NVS) and so from then all models were designated Dash 8Q-300s. In 1998 the aircraft was again renamed, this time to Dash 8-Q300 when a new interior was also introduced.

Powerplants

300A - Two 1775kW (2380shp) Pratt & Whitney Canada PW123A turboprops driving four blade Hamilton Standard propellers. 300B - Two 1865kW (2500shp) PW123Bs.

Performance

300 - Max cruising speed 532km/h (287kt). Initial rate of climb 1800ft/min. Service ceiling 25,000ft. Range with full passenger load and reserves 1538km (830nm), with 2720kg (6000lb) payload 1612km (870nm). 300B - Max cruising speed 528km/h (285kt). Range with 50 passengers 1625km (878nm), with 50 passengers and auxiliary fuel 2275km (1228nm).

Weights

300 - Operating empty 11,657kg (25,700lb), standard max takeoff 18,642kg (41,100lb). 300B - Operating empty 11,719kg (25,836lb), max takeoff 19,505kg (43,000lb).

Dimensions

Wing span 27.43m (90ft 0in), length 25.68m (84ft 3in), height 7.49m (24ft 7in). Wing area 56.2m2 (605sq ft).

Capacity

Flightcrew of two. Standard single class seating for 50 passengers at four abreast and 81cm (32in) pitch.

Production

Total orders for Dash 8-300s stood at over 136 by late 1998, of which 128 were in service.

 

Source: www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/de-havilland-canada-dhc-8...

   

Old industrial sewer control system

After Amtrak's Positive Train Control system debacle over the weekend, trains were running once again on Monday. Here, Lincoln Service train 301 rolls south along 11th Street on Springfield's north side.

 

Here's some news stories for future posterity:

 

www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/server-issues-c...

 

www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/ptc-issues-caus...

  

IDTX 4618 - SC-44 Charger

 

March 27, 2023

Link video: youtu.be/5JhCkbj3qSQ

A college student in Hanoi, Vietnam, has spent up to $23,000 building his own Batmobile.

Nguyen Dac Chung, born in 1998, is a student of architecture and modelled his functional DIY project of the iconic supercar in the Batman film, "The Dark Knight."

 

Dac Chung said: “This product is a project that I have been cherishing for three years, and I have been working on it for more than 10 months."

Cool footage from September 5 shows the intricate design of the Batmobile that measures a nifty 3.6 metres long and 2.3 metres wide.

 

Dac Chung designed the car in 3D before building it himself. He ordered the tyres and wheels from America and South Korea and installed a full range of vehicle control systems, brakes, and lighting. Currently, Dac Chung is in the process of finishing the interior.

SLR Class :- S9

Introduction year :- 2000

No of Sets :- 15

Power car Nos :- 849 to 863

Builder :- Sifang Loco. & Rolling Stock Works

State :- China

Prime Mover :- MTU - V12 396 TC 14

Mode of Power transmission : - Diesel Electric (AC to DC Power Transmission)

Power :- 1400 H.P.

rpm :- 1500

Weight :- 67 ton

Length :- 65’

Wheel arrangement :- Bo-Bo

Brake system :- Air and Dynamic

Max speed :- 100 Km/h

Gauge :- 1676 mm

Type :- Diesel Multiple Unit

Set Formation :- One power car,Four 3rd Class Compartment and 3rd Class dummy car

Purpose :- Suburban and Commuter service.

 

S9 855,856,857,858 and 863 Installed new control system by CSR Qingdao Sifang Co. Ltd in 2017

S9 851 and 852 Installed new control system by Medha Servo Drives Pvt Ltd in 2022

  

Information as at 17.07.2023

 

The 212th. Legion secretly was transported to a separatist controled system 2 weeks ago. The Rebuplic intelligence had discovered a magor droid factory hidden on a remote planet, and needed us to take it down. General Kenobi devided us into small squads so we could stage multiple attacks at once. The clankers put up little resistance though, after all, we are the 212th. Attack Legion.

 

All I have to is 212th. troopers are awesome, and if you ever get the chance you MUST get one! :D

Also this is my entry into my Best Brickr with n7mereel!

Rhododendron occidentale—western azalea. Grows from southern Oregon in the Coast Ranges and Sierra Nevada as far south as Monterey and Kern Counties, with disjunct populations in Riverside and San Diego Counties. Introduced into Great Britain by 1850, the western azalea became an important contributor to the gene pool the created the modern hybrid ornamental azalea. Sheepmen detest the western azalea because its leaves are sheep killers.. The California Poison Control System rates the toxicity as "Major." Rhododendrons, in general, are also said to be a source of "mad honey," a malady that exists more in folklore than in reality. Photographed at Regional Parks Botanic Garden located in Tilden Regional Park near Berkeley, CA.

 

Pumper control -- Pierce Fire Truck. Orem Fire Services.

During the initial testing of the Arrow, there were no major problems but a few minor issues with the flight control system and the long landing gear began to emerge. The landing gear issue was predominantly with the tandem main gear. Since it was so narrow (in order to fit within the wings), the leg shortened and rotated as it was stowed. During one landing incident, the chain mechanism used to shorten the gear in the Mk. 1 gear jammed, resulting in incomplete rotation. In a second incident with RL-202 on 11 November 1958, the flight control system commanded elevons full down at landing, which put less weight on the landing gear, thus reducing tire friction, and resulting in brake lockup and subsequent gear collapse.

 

In this image, Arrow RL-202 experiences the infamous November landing gear collapse. The original photograph shows the brakes spewing flames and sparks, something I wanted to create for this image. I used a combination of Studio 2.0’s illumination rendering and some Photoshop trickery. I replaced the opaque runway tiles with illuminated tiles under the wheels, thus providing the glow on the underside of the model. I also “sunk” the back tires into the runway to make it look like they are flat. Unlike LDD, Studio 2.0 allows for overlapping or colliding pieces to be rendered so I took advantage of it for this image. The smoke and sparks were added in Photoshop, as well as all of the usual livery and effects.

AKSM-32100D is a trolleybus with a transistorized control system based on IGBT modules and an AC induction motor, equipped with accumulators based on lithium-iron-phosphate batteries with a reserve of autonomous travel up to 30 kilometers. Unlike base model AKSM-32100, it is equipped with a 150 kW traction motor. The first three ones were delivered to Ulyanovsk, Russia at the end of 2015. In 2016-2019 St. Petersburg received 35 ones, others were delivered to Belarus cities (5 to Grodno, 4 to Gomel, 4 to Vitebsk). In 2021, they were delivered to Belarus capital Minsk (25 ones) and Vratsa (9). In December 2021, three more restyled trolleybuses came to Grodno to operate the new route 24.

 

АКСМ-32100D trolleybuses are produced by the Belarus company Belkommunmash (BKM; Производственное Объединение «Белкоммунмаш», БКМ). BKM was organized in 1973 on the basis of the streetcar and trolleybus repair shop under the Ministry of Municipal Economy of the Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the first two decades the plant was repairing trolleybuses and streetcars of Minsk. After USSR breakage the independent Belarus got a strong incentive to develop its own vehicles production. Therefore a few articulated trolleybuses YMZ T1 (ЮМЗ Т1) were assembled at the plant in 1993 from engineering sets of Yuzhny Machine Building Plant of Ukraine. The enterprise also modernized trolleybuses of the ZIU models 100 - 101 produced by the Engels Electric Transportation Plant (later CJSC "TrolZa") in Engels, Saratov region of Russia. Later the company started to develop its own trolleybus models, the first model AKSM 201 (АКСМ 201) appeared in 1996, followed by models 213, 221, 321 (as in foto) and 333. Since 2000 the production of streetcars started: AKSM-1M, AKSM-60102. In 2016, the production of electric buses has been organized. Today the BKM Holding (ОАО «Управляющая компания холдинга «Белкоммунмаш» - ОАО «УКХ «БКМ) is the leading industrial enterprise in Belarus in the field of production and overhaul of rolling stock of urban electric transport.

The F-104F was produced for West Germany between 1959-1960 and was the first German Starfighter to enter service. The F-variant was similar to the F-104D two-seat combat trainer. It was powered by the G-variant’s J79-GE-11A turbojet, but lacked the all-weather NASARR fire-control system of the F-104G and was not combat-capable.

 

From 1960 onwards, new Starfighters were entering the Luftwaffe almost daily. The need for massive training pilot training was required to get the aircraft into service quickly. The Luftwaffe set up a training school at Luke AFB in Arizona where the F-104Fs were assigned to the 4512th, 4518th, and 4443rd Combat Crew Training Squadrons or the USAF. Initially, the Luftwaffe’s F-104Fs were painted with standard USAF insignia and carried USAF serial numbers. After the aircraft were reassigned to Waffenschule 10, they were repainted in Luftwaffe insignia and assigned German serial numbers.

 

In this image, an F-104F of the Waffenschule 10, based at Norvenich in Germany, shares the tarmac with its East German counterpart, the MiG-21UB Mongol-B. Both aircraft are very similar in size and speed and exported widely throughout the world in the 1960s, becoming icons of Cold War airpower.

On December 28, 2015, both units 4000 and 4001 were unveiled with a modified version of the special DC to AC paint scheme. The front logo was changed from gold to white with a black horse, while the rear logo was changed from blue to white with a black horse. The "horsehead" logos on each side of the engine compartment were changed from blue to black. Units were rebuilt by American Motive Power, Inc. (AMP) in Dansville, NY, under contract with GE. The rebuilding included conversion to AC traction utilizing GE electrical components, new electrical cabinet, replacement of the existing crew cab and low short hood with a new GE widenose and cab, new replacement trucks, and additional weight was added to bring the units up to 432,000 pounds when fully loaded with supplies.

 

NS Model Designation = AC44C6M

Horsepower = 4,400

Fuel Tank Capacity = 5,000 gallons

Dynamic Braking = Yes

Control = Single

Cab Signals = Yes

LSL (Locomotive Speed Limiter) = Yes

 

Units are equipped with cab air conditioning.

 

Units are equipped for use in DPU (Distributed Power Unit) operation.

 

Units are equipped for ECP (Electronically Controlled Pneumatic) train braking.

 

Units are equipped with NS LEADER/PTC (Positive Train Control) system.

 

All six axles are powered with GE 5GEB13B7 AC traction motors.

   

With the arrival of the Olifant in Samaria, the engineers of the Samarian Ordnance Corps finally had access to a design that was decent enough to further develop into an indigenous design. The project was given the codename Raam (רעם/Thunder), as the new tank was supposed to be faster than the Piyl, the Samarian version of the Olifant.

Lacking any significant experience in actual tank design, help from the outside was quickly sought in Die Wêreldryk, where the Olifant was designed. Further aid came from the Nordic Union, that was generous enough to send a team of engineers that had worked on the Stridsvagn 101, in response to the Samarian request. The vast knowledge and skill of all these engineers was just what the Ordnance Corps needed, and design work on the new tanks progressed swiftly. With high speed in mind, a very powerful engine was developed under the name Sufa (סופה/Whirlwind), specifically for this project. The 105 mm gun from the Piyl was adapted and given a shorter barrel, just like the L7 on the Strv 101. It was only marginally less accurate than the one on the Piyl, but shared the same punching power, making it quite the competitive gun. Secondary armament was also similar to the Piyl, consisting of a co-axially mounted and a pintle-mounted 12.7 mm heavy machine gun. The final result was a machine that looked quite similar to the Nordic Strv 101, but with lots of technology from the Afrikaanse Olifant, and was dubbed Sho’t (שוט/Whip).

Testing showed that the top speed was an impressive 67.5 km/h on dirt roads, with performance in sand dropping to only about 56 km/h. Armour was not deemed very important, as the latest rounds could penetrate almost everything. To cut costs and reduce training, Thermal sights and IR sights were left out, limiting the Sho’t to daytime operations only, or clear nights with plenty of moonlight. This was compensated by the Piyl’s excellent range and ability to fight at night. Testing showed that the engine was prone to overheating, but this was fixed in the production model, with the installation of the improved Sufa IV engine. Crew comfort was also not excellent by any standards. The seats were tiny and rock-hard, the driver would often bang his elbow against the ammo rack that was right next to him when shifting, the gunner didn’t have much room, nor a personal hatch, …

In service, crews were not that bothered by the lack of comfort. The reliable Sufa IV needed little maintenance, as did the rest of the tank. Proving to be a reliable and hard-hitting weapon, it was used to great effect during the Tiran Crisis, aided by the long-range fire support from the Piyls. The fast Sho’ts utilized flanking manoeuvres, and took advantage of gaps created by the Piyls, confusing and wreaking havoc among the Anbat forces and allowing the Piyls to move up and take over strategic locations.Just like the Piyls, the Sho’ts were regularly updated with new optics, new turret rotating mechanism, a new gun stabiliser and a new fire-control system.

The latest plans to further extend the service life of the Sho’t is the addition of Pullover ERA, to give it a fighting chance against the man-portable ATGMs that are becoming more and more common.

 

This picture shows a typical Sho’t during an operation. The crew has loaded it up with personal belongings, rations, spare parts and a log to free them in case they get stuck.

 

First Gen MBT

Gun: 105mm +0

Armour: Centurion +0

Hull: 76 mm / 50 mm (Skirts: +6 mm) / 38 mm

Turret: 152 mm / 89 mm / 89 mm

Speed: 65 km/h: +0

Perks:

Advanced Optics +1

Low Maintenance: +1

Quirks:

No Thermal Sights: -1

Uncomfy: -1

Cost: 6₪

 

I heavily modified Aranethon’s Olifant, to the point that only some parts of the turret are from the original model. But still huge thanks to him, I wouldn’t have started this without the original one.

  

“STS-30 --- The Space Shuttle Atlantis glides toward a landing on the Mojave Desert after spending just over four full days in space. Aboard the spacecraft were Astronauts David M. Walker, Ronald J. Crabe, Norman E. Thagard, Mary L. Cleave and Mark C. Lee. Moments later, the spacecraft’s landing gear came to a stop at 12:44:33 p.m. (PDT), 8 May 19890. It landed on Runway 22, a concrete facility, like a number of other NASA flights. Still others have landed on unpaved dry lake bed strips.”

 

Not a mention of the mission, the deployment of the Magellan/Venus radar mapper spacecraft - THE FIRST U.S. PLANETARY MISSION IN ELEVEN - 11 - IIIII IIIII I years! But by golly, now we know that, like a number of other orbiters, it landed on a concrete runway! The pièce de résistance: 'still others' landed on unpaved dry lake beds!!! No!?! Really?!? That being the key takeaway from this photograph. O - M - G. The bar being exceedingly low, at least it didn’t reference the pretty clouds in the bright blue sky.

Astronaut James A. McDivitt, commander of Gemini IV, suited in preparation for weight and balance tests. The objective of the Gemini IV mission was to evaluate and test the effects of four days in space on the crew, equipment and control systems. Pilot Edward White II successfully accomplished the first U.S. spacewalk during the Gemini IV mission.

 

NASA Media Usage Guidelines

 

Credit: NASA

Image Number: 65-H-790

Date: May 21, 1965

An E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system from the 961st Airborne Air Control Squadron takes off from Kadena Air Base, Japan, Nov. 10, 2015. The AWACS aircraft provides all-weather surveillance, command, control and communications needed by commanders of U.S., NATO and other allied air defense forces. (U.S. Air Force photo/Naoto Anazawa)