View allAll Photos Tagged conversion
"You have heart, Murray."
"Hey, Loki? Why are you talking to my shoes when I'm behind you, and why are you hanging outside the bath while I was having a shower?"
2D-3D conversion to Anaglyph. Red/Cyan filtered 3D glasses required to view. Image from a wallpaper site on the web. The artist name is Ciruelo Cabral. Signed as "Ciruelo".
37061 undergoing conversion at Crewe Works on 27th April 1986. She was re-numbered to 37799 on 13th August 1986
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The OA-1E was a response to the 1963 "tri-service" specification for the Light Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (LARA) for U.S. Navy, Air Force and Army. The LARA requirement was based on a perceived need for a new type of "jungle fighting" versatile light attack and observation aircraft. Existing military aircraft in the observation role, such as the Cessna O-1 Bird Dog and Cessna O-2 Skymaster, were perceived as obsolescent, with too slow a speed and too small a load capacity for this flexible role.
A total of eleven proposals were submitted, among them were the Grumman Model 134R (a tandem-seat version of the already fielded U.S. Army's OV-1 Mohawk), the Convair Model 48 Charger, the Helio 1320, the Lockheed CL-760, a Martin design, and the North American/Rockwell NA-300. The LARA competition raged on until mid-1964, and it eventually spawned the successful OV-10 Bronco, which made its maiden flight in 1965 and eventually entered frontline service in Vietnam in 1968.
Douglas had proposed the D-885 design to the LARA competition, but had already been working on a concept for an armed military observation and attack aircraft, designed for battlefield surveillance and strike capabilities, in all weather conditions, day and night. This had been a private venture proposal, and USN and USMC approved it under the condition that it would be a cheap solution, being ready for front line tests in mid-1965 – much quicker than the OV-10, which also lacked the all-weather capability at that time.
Since time was pressing, the aircraft was based on the AD/A-1 Skyraider airframe and the program christened "Low Altitude Gunship and Obeservation System" (LAGOS). The resulting YOA-1E was based on the "Flying Dumptruck", the A-1E (AD-5) airframe with side-by-side seating and a spacious cockpit which had become necessary for the crew of three: a pilot, a co-pilot/navigator and an observer/gunman, combined with state-of-the-art sensor and weapon equipment plus the technical infrastructure for both.
The YOA-1E's special equipment included a relatively compact, turreted forward looking infrared (FLIR) sensor ball under the fuselage, combined with a laser target designator, a highly innovative feature at the time. The respective ‘Paveway’ series of laser-guided bombs had just been developed by Texas Instruments, starting in 1964, and the LAGOS YOA-1E had been one of the first operational aircraft that could illuminate and deploy laser-guided smart weapons. Other sensors included low-light cameras and an array of IR sensors that were installed in a bulged faring on port side. Several passive radar and IR warning sensors completed the package.
Tactically, the idea was to identify a ground target, lock onto it with the sensors and either mark the target with the laser for other aircraft that would deploy laser-guided ordnance, or circle around the target at maximum cannon range (which was outside of typical small arms fire) at an altitude of 6.000-8.000 feet and suppress or destroy the target with gun fire.
The OA-1E would not carry laser-guided bombs, though, since it lacked proper speed to deploy them effectively, and laser-guided missiles were still far beyond the horizon (the light AGM-114 Hellfire's development started in 1974, and the laser-guided AGM-65C Maverick would enter testing in 1978!).
But the agile and stable aircraft had other benefits: One special feature of the YOA-1E was a turreted, three-barreled 20 mm (.79 in) XM197 gun under the rear fuselage. This gatling gun, also a new development, originally for the AH-1 attack helicopter, was slaved to the FLIR aimpoint and could cover almost the complete lower hemisphere. Using a gun turret instead of fixed armament was expected to improve versatility, esp. against small, mobile targets and at very low altitude. The gun could also fire directly backwards, so that a limited rear defense was provided, too.
The XM197 was supplied from a massive magazine of 1.500 linked rounds that occupied much of the cabin’s rear, with a total capacity including feeder system of 1.600 rounds. This early XM 197 had a cyclic rate of fire of 650 RPM, at a muzzle velocity of 1.030 m/sec. This resulted in a potential constant fire of almost 3 min., even though standard practice was to fire the cannon in 30 to 50 round bursts, in order to save ammunition and to prevent overheating problems.
As a weight compensation measure, two of the A-1E’s original wing-mounted cannons were deleted, as well as the central underfuselage pylon which made way for the sensor/gun installation. The rest of the underwings hardpoints were retained, though, even though offensive ordnance was rarely carried.
In the course of the LAGOS program a total of four A-1E aircraft were modified, and three of them outfited for field testing of equipment and tactics. All of these machines were ready for service in late 1966. The operational trio was immediately transferred to East Asia in order to support the USMC troops, which had been sent to the Vietnam war theatre since March.
The three operational YOA-1Es were attached to the US Navy’s VA-33, 'Ironhides'. This was a short-lived Attack Squadron, originally based at Naval Station Sangley Point, Philippines, but deployed to Cam Ranh Air Base. There, the Skyraider squadron flew missions next to VAH-21 'Roadrunners', another special unit that operated four highly modfied AP-2H night surveillance and attack versions of the Lockheed P-2 Neptune aircraft. VAH-21 also had a field test task, because the squadron carried out night interdiction and electronic surveillance missions, as part of the USN’s Project TRIM (Trails Roads Interdiction Multi-Sensor).
Flying covert operations, the YOA-1E trio helped a lot in technical development, and the front line test revealed several flaws and problems of the overall concept. Primarily, the early FLIR and laser designator were not reliable under the humid climate of Vietnam.
The XM 197 cannon was troublesome, too. The gun itself worked well, but the ammunition feeding system was prone to jamming – a flaw that kept haunting later, helicopter-mounted variants, too. Anyway, the massive firepower earned the YOA-1E the nickname “The Ewer” and the gun turret turned out to be highly effective.
The OA-1Es even scored a single, documented air victory: an unsuspecting Vietnamese MiG-17PF night fighter was shot down with the XM197 in early 1970, when VA-33's OA-1E ‘01’, 'Pluto', dodged a surprise attack from behind and the gunner instinctively opened defensive fire - not an aimed counterattack, but neverthless successful!
The three OA-1Es were frequently deployed in a wide range of tasks and missions. These started in 1967 with reconnaissance missions at night, but with more and more experience withz the machines, their capabilities and their maintenance, a multitude of assignments were tried and accomplished.
One very successful role was the OA-1E’s use as mini gunships during “Sandy” (pilot recovery) missions, in which they escorted CH-53 rescue helicopters, suppressed enemy fire or supported other escorting A-1s, guiding them to hidden targets.
The LAGOS Skyraiders were also tested in pathfinder missions for faster aircraft, which would deploy their laser-guided Paveway bombs in a more effective fashion from a safe distance and from higher altitudes.
Another field in which the OA-1Es helped to gather tactical information for the later OV-10 was FAC duty. The Skyraider’s high loitering time proved to be very valuable, as well as its rigidity and its sophisticated sensor array.
Furthermore, the three Ewers accomplished aerial radiological reconnaissance, tactical air observation, artillery and naval gunfire spotting, airborne control of tactical air support operations as well as front line, low-level aerial photography. One of the machines (‘03’, 'Journey's End') was even provisionally modified to lay smoke screens, and it was extremely successful.
The aircraft was kept in service by its evaluators for several months and only reluctantly released. The smoke screen system did not catch on, though, due to a perceived lack of missions.
Racked armament in the Vietnam War was usually light. Beyond drop tanks to extend loitering time, typical loads were seven- and nineteen-shot 2.75 in (70 mm) LAU rocket pods with white phosphorus marker rounds or high-explosive rockets or 5” (127 mm) four-shot Zuni rocket pods. Bombs, ADSIDS air-delivered seismic sensors, Mk-6 battlefield illumination flares, and other stores were carried as well.
But the heavy equipment load and the XM197’s ammunition (the rounds themselves weighed more than 3.500 lb (1.600 kg)!) naturally limited the external ordnance stores’ volume and made the aircraft rather sluggish.
The LAGOS OA-1E proved to be too heavy and limited for a COIN aircraft, even though it was popular among the crews and basically performed well. The Skyraider airframe could take a lot of punishment and still make it home, and the low speed/low altitude handling was very good, despite the ponderous special equipment. But the aircraft could only be safely deployed in total air superiority conditions, and in the end the modern technology could not make up the old airframe’s weaknesses.
Consequently, the field tests were stopped in late 1970, the three machines taken back to the US and Douglas and further development of the LAGOS concept was halted, even though the insights were transferred to other developments like the OV-10D NOGS for the USMC and the AC-130 gunships for the USAF.
General characteristics:
Crew: Three
Length: 38 ft 10 in (11.84 m)
Wingspan: 50 ft 0¼ in (15.25 m)
Height: 15 ft 8¼ in (4.78 m)
Wing area: 400.3 ft² (37.19 m²)
Empty weight: 11,968 lb (5,429 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,106 lb (8,213 kg)
Max. take-off weight: 25,000 lb (11,340 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Wright R-3350-26WA radial engine, 2,700 hp (2,000 kW)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 322 mph (280 kn, 518 km/h) at 18,000 ft (5,500 m)
Cruise speed: 198 mph (172 kn, 319 km/h)
Range: 1,316 mi (1,144 nmi, 2,115 km)
Service ceiling: 28,500 ft (8,685 m)
Rate of climb: 2,850 ft/min (14.5 m/s)
Wing loading: 45 lb/ft² (220 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.15 hp/lb (250 W/kg)
Armament:
2× M2 20mm (0.79 in) cannon in the wings
1× XM 197 20mm (0.79 in) cannon in a ventral turret
15 hardpoints for theoretically up to 8,000 lb (3,600 kg) of external ordnance, but rarely used due to the massive ammunition magazine of the XM 197
The kit and its assembly:
This has been on my whif agenda for long, and was initially inspired by the OV-10D NOGS project – a Bronco with night vision sensors and a turreted cannon under its belly. I wondered if this concept could not have been tested a few years earlier, during the Vietnam conflict? The technology underwent initial field tests at that time, e. g. in form of the AP-2H or the B-57G “Tropic Moon”. Gunships like the AC-47 or AC-119 were also a proven concept – so why not meld everything into a compact aircraft?
The A-1E seemed a good basis, with its spacious fuselage, and the basis for this modification is the Monogram kit from the late 60ies, in this case a Revell re-boxing.
The kit is rather simple and has some weak points, e.g. the crude landing gear and engine, or massive ejector pin markings under the stabilizer. I only changed what I deemed necessary, as this was to become a prototype on the basis of a stock A-1E. Hence, I only changed the interior layout with a massive box (the ammunition depot, actually a Revell Me 262 cockpit tub turned upseide down…) and a work station for the observer/gunner behind the pilots’ cabin with a seat and a screen.
The sensor and turret balls were scratched – these are actually shoulder joints from a Dorvack PA mecha kit, fitted in matching holes in the fuselage. As a side effect, the things can be moved and the shoulder fulcrum was used to mount the cannon, so that this became moveable, too. The space between the turrets was faired as good as possible.
On the hull, several antennae and bumps were added, and different main wheels (IIRC from an Italeri MiG-29!) were used. The flaps were lowered, too, for a more lively look. As ordnance, two drop tanks (smaller than those that come with the kit, from an Italeri BAe Hawk), a single pair of LAU rocket launchers on the outer wing stations (from an Italeri A-4M, IIRC) and two first generation ECM pods (an ALQ-81 and ALQ-101, from a Hasegawa aircraft weapon set) were added.
Painting and markings:
The wrap-around paint scheme was another important factor to build this whif kit - it looks pretty cool and popped up several times in the late 60ies and the 70ies, e. g. on the USMC’s OV-10D prototypes, and on the US Navy’s AP-2Hs from VAH-21 in Vietnam.
The scheme was, AFAIK, made from three grey tones: FS 36118 (Gunship Grey), FS 36231 (Dark Gull Grey) and FS 36440 (Light Gull Grey), and these colors were prone to weathering and bleaching under the tropical East Asia climate, so that the Light Gull Grey appears almost like white. This was simulated with some black ink wash and dry-brushing all over the hull.
The interior was painted in Neutral Grey (FS 36173), while the landing gear was kept all-white.
The decals were puzzled together, but mostly from the Revell kit's decal sheet that offers a USAF machine and two USN machines, a blue and a grey one.
IMHO, the result was worth the effort - the paint scheme looks very good on the bulky Skyraider, and the changes with the weapon/sensor gondola is rather subtle, it's only obvious at second glance and it IMHO even looks plausible in this position and arrangement?
I completely redid this web image convesion from 2D-3D using SPM and a little help from Photoshop. The anaglyph conversion requires Red/Cyan 3D glasses to view.
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X (sometimes referred to as VF-X1) was strictly a conventional/non-transformable jet aircraft, even though it incorporated many structural components and several key technologies that were vital for the transformable VF-1’s successful development that ran in parallel. Therefore, the VF-X was never intended as an air superiority fighter, but rather a flight-capable analogue test bed and proof of concept for the VF-1’s basic layout and major components. In this role, however, the VF-X made vital contributions to systems’ development that were later incorporated into the VF-1’s serial production and sped the program up considerably.
VF-X production started in early 2006, with four airframes built. The flight tests began in February 2007. The first prototype (“01”) was piloted and evaluated by ace pilot Roy Fokker, in order to explore the aircraft’s flight envelope, general handling and for external stores carriage tests. The three other VF-Xs successively joined the test program, each with a different focus. “02” was primarily tasked with the flight control and pilot interface program, “03” was allocated to the engine, vectoring thrust and steering systems development, and “04” was primarily involved in structural and fatigue tests.
In November 2007, the successful VF-X tests and the flights of the VF-X-1 (the first fully transformable VF-1 prototype, which had been under construction in parallel to the VF-X program) led to formal adoption of the “Valkyrie” variable fighter by the United Nations Government.
The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict.
Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha, even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.
The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements. These included the GBP-1S "Armored Valkyrie” external armor and infantry weapons pack, so-called FAST Packs for "Super Valkyries” for orbital use, and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Strike Valkyrie” with additional firepower.
After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.
The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), and several upgrade programs were introduced.
The fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction.
General characteristics:
Accommodation: One pilot in a Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)
Height 3.84 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)
4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);
Performance:
Top speed: Mach 2.71 at 10,000 m; Mach 3.87 at 30,000+ m
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Armament:
None installed, but the VF-X had 4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, plus a ventral hardpoint for a Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min or other stores like test instruments
The model and its assembly:
Another submission to the “Prototypes” group build at whatifmodelers.com in July 2020. Being a VF-1 fan (and have built maybe twenty o these simple Arii kits), adding a VF-X was, more or less, a must – even more so because I had a suitable Valkyrie Fighter kit at hand for the conversion. As a side note, I have actually built something quite similar from a VF-1D many years ago: a fictional, non-transformable advanced trainer, without knowing about the VF-X at all.
Thanks to the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, the differences between the transformable VF-1 and its early testbed were easy to identify:
- Fixed legs with faired ducts from the intakes on (thighs)
- Ankle recesses disappeared
- Less and slightly different panel lines on the back and on the nose
- ventral head unit deleted and a respective fairing installed instead
- Levelled underside (shoulder fairings of the folded arms were cut down)
- Leg attachment points on the nose deleted
- No small, circular vernier thrusters all around the hull
- Some new/different venting grills (created mostly with 0.5mm black decal stripes)
Beyond the changes, the VF-1A was basically built OOB. Thankfully, the VF-X already features the later VF-1’s vectored thrust nozzles/feet, so that no changes had to be made in this respect. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit for the beauty pics, and after the flight scenes had been shot, the canopy remained open on a swing arm for static display. For the same reason, the model was built with the landing gear extended.
As a test aircraft, the underwing pylons and their AMM-1 ordnance were left away and the attachment points hidden with putty. I also omitted the ventral gun pod and left the aircraft clean. However, for the flight scene pictures, I implanted an adapter for a display holder made from wire.
In order to emphasize the test vehicle character of the VF-X, I gave the model a scratched spin recovery parachute installation between the fins, using a real world F-22 testbed as benchmark. It consists of styrene profiles, quite a delicate construction. For the same reason I gave the VF-X a long sensor boom on the nose, which changes the Valkyrie’s look, too. Finally, some small blade antennae were added to the nose and to the spine behind the cockpit.
Painting and markings:
To be honest, I have no idea if there was only a single VF-X prototype in the Macross universe, or more. Just one appears in the TV series in episode #33, and lack of suitable information and my personal lack of Japanese language proficiency prevents any deeper research. However, this would not keep me from inventing a personal interpretation of the canonical VF-X, especially because I do not really like the original livery from the TV series: an overall light grey with some simple black trim and “TEST” written on the (fixed) legs. Yamato did an 1:60 scale toy of the VF-X, but it was/is just a VF-1 with a ventral fairing; they added some shading to the basic grey – but this does not make the aircraft more attractive, IMHO.
When I looked at the original conceptual drawing of the VF-X in the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, however, I was immediately reminded of the F-15 prototypes from the Seventies (and this program used a total of twelve machines!). These featured originally a light grey (FS 36375?) overall base, to which bright dayglo orange markings on wings, fins and fuselage were soon added – in a very similar pattern to the VF-X. I think the VF-X livery was actually inspired by this, the time frame matches well with the production of the Macross TV series, too, and that’s what I adapted for my model.
In order to come close to the F-15 prototype livery, I gave “my” VF-X an overall basic coat of RAL 7047 “Telegrau 4”, one of German Telekom’s corporate colors and a very pale grey that can easily be mistaken for white when you do not have a contrast reference.
The cockpit received a medium grey finish, the ejection seat became black with brown cushions; the pilot figure is a 1:100 seated passenger from an architecture supplies, painted like an early VF-1 pilot in a white/blue suit. The jet nozzles/feet were painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with grinded graphite for a more metallic finish. The landing gear became classic white (I used Revell 301, which is a very pure tone, as contrast to the RAL 7047 on the hull), the air intake ducts and the internal sections of the VG wings were painted with dark grey (Revell 77).
For some diversity I took inspiration from the Yamato VF-X toy and added slightly darker (Humbrol 166, RAF Light Aircraft Grey) areas to the hull and the legs. Next, the panel lines were emphasized through a thinned black ink wash, but I did no panel post shading so that the VF-X would not look too dirty or worn.
Onto this basis I applied the orange dayglo markings. On the wings and fins, these were painted – they were applied with spray paint from a rattle can, involving lots of masking. The leading edges on wings and fins were created with grey decal sheet material, too. At this stage, some surface details and more fake panel lines were added with a soft pencil.
The orange cheatline under the cockpit is a personal addition; I found that some more orange had to be added to the nose for visual balance, and I eventually went for the simple, trimmed stripe (TL Modellbau material) instead of trying to apply decal sheet material around the jagged air intakes (F-15 prototype style). The black “TEST”, “VFX” and “U.N. Spacy” markings were designed at the computer and printed on clear inkjet decal paper. Even though the “real” VF-X does not feature the UNS “kite” insignia, I decided to add them to the model. These come from the OOB sheet, which also provided most (slightly yellowed) stencils.
Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
A rather different VF-1 project (and it is – to my astonishment – #28 in my 1:100 VF-1 Fighter mode collection!!!), with more changes to the basic model kit than one might expect at first sight. VF-X and VF-1 differ considerably from each other, despite identical outlines! However, I like the outcome, and I think that going a different route from the canonical grey/black livery paid out, the bright orange markings really make this VF-X stand out, and it looks IMHO more like a testbed than the “real” aircraft from the TV series.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The OV-10 Bronco was initially conceived in the early 1960s through an informal collaboration between W. H. Beckett and Colonel K. P. Rice, U.S. Marine Corps, who met at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California, and who also happened to live near each other. The original concept was for a rugged, simple, close air support aircraft integrated with forward ground operations. At the time, the U.S. Army was still experimenting with armed helicopters, and the U.S. Air Force was not interested in close air support.
The concept aircraft was to operate from expedient forward air bases using roads as runways. Speed was to be from very slow to medium subsonic, with much longer loiter times than a pure jet. Efficient turboprop engines would give better performance than piston engines. Weapons were to be mounted on the centerline to get efficient aiming. The inventors favored strafing weapons such as self-loading recoilless rifles, which could deliver aimed explosive shells with less recoil than cannons, and a lower per-round weight than rockets. The airframe was to be designed to avoid the back blast.
Beckett and Rice developed a basic platform meeting these requirements, then attempted to build a fiberglass prototype in a garage. The effort produced enthusiastic supporters and an informal pamphlet describing the concept. W. H. Beckett, who had retired from the Marine Corps, went to work at North American Aviation to sell the aircraft.
The aircraft's design supported effective operations from forward bases. The OV-10 had a central nacelle containing a crew of two in tandem and space for cargo, and twin booms containing twin turboprop engines. The visually distinctive feature of the aircraft is the combination of the twin booms, with the horizontal stabilizer that connected them at the fin tips. The OV-10 could perform short takeoffs and landings, including on aircraft carriers and large-deck amphibious assault ships without using catapults or arresting wires. Further, the OV-10 was designed to take off and land on unimproved sites. Repairs could be made with ordinary tools. No ground equipment was required to start the engines. And, if necessary, the engines would operate on high-octane automobile fuel with only a slight loss of power.
The aircraft had responsive handling and could fly for up to 5½ hours with external fuel tanks. The cockpit had extremely good visibility for both pilot and co-pilot, provided by a wrap-around "greenhouse" that was wider than the fuselage. North American Rockwell custom ejection seats were standard, with many successful ejections during service. With the second seat removed, the OV-10 could carry 3,200 pounds (1,500 kg) of cargo, five paratroopers, or two litter patients and an attendant. Empty weight was 6,969 pounds (3,161 kg). Normal operating fueled weight with two crew was 9,908 pounds (4,494 kg). Maximum takeoff weight was 14,446 pounds (6,553 kg).
The bottom of the fuselage bore sponsons or "stub wings" that improved flight performance by decreasing aerodynamic drag underneath the fuselage. Normally, four 7.62 mm (.308 in) M60C machine guns were carried on the sponsons, accessed through large forward-opening hatches. The sponsons also had four racks to carry bombs, pods, or fuel. The wings outboard of the engines contained two additional hardpoints, one per side. Racked armament in the Vietnam War was usually seven-shot 2.75 in (70 mm) rocket pods with white phosphorus marker rounds or high-explosive rockets, or 5" (127 mm) four-shot Zuni rocket pods. Bombs, ADSIDS air-delivered/para-dropped unattended seismic sensors, Mk-6 battlefield illumination flares, and other stores were also carried.
Operational experience showed some weaknesses in the OV-10's design. It was significantly underpowered, which contributed to crashes in Vietnam in sloping terrain because the pilots could not climb fast enough. While specifications stated that the aircraft could reach 26,000 feet (7,900 m), in Vietnam the aircraft could reach only 18,000 feet (5,500 m). Also, no OV-10 pilot survived ditching the aircraft.
The OV-10 served in the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy, as well as in the service of a number of other countries. In U.S. military service, the Bronco was operated until the early Nineties, and obsoleted USAF OV-10s were passed on to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms for anti-drug operations. A number of OV-10As furthermore ended up in the hands of the California Department of Forestry (CDF) and were used for spotting fires and directing fire bombers onto hot spots.
This was not the end of the OV-10 in American military service, though: In 2012, the type gained new attention because of its unique qualities. A $20 million budget was allocated to activate an experimental USAF unit of two airworthy OV-10Gs, acquired from NASA and the State Department. These machines were retrofitted with military equipment and were, starting in May 2015, deployed overseas to support Operation “Inherent Resolve”, flying more than 120 combat sorties over 82 days over Iraq and Syria. Their concrete missions remained unclear, and it is speculated they provided close air support for Special Forces missions, esp. in confined urban environments where the Broncos’ loitering time and high agility at low speed and altitude made them highly effective and less vulnerable than helicopters.
Furthermore, these Broncos reputedly performed strikes with the experimental AGR-20A “Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS)”, a Hydra 70-millimeter rocket with a laser-seeking head as guidance - developed for precision strikes against small urban targets with little collateral damage. The experiment ended satisfactorily, but the machines were retired again, and the small unit was dissolved.
However, the machines had shown their worth in asymmetric warfare, and the U.S. Air Force decided to invest in reactivating the OV-10 on a regular basis, despite the overhead cost of operating an additional aircraft type in relatively small numbers – but development and production of a similar new type would have caused much higher costs, with an uncertain time until an operational aircraft would be ready for service. Re-activating a proven design and updating an existing airframe appeared more efficient.
The result became the MV-10H, suitably christened “Super Bronco” but also known as “Black Pony”, after the program's internal name. This aircraft was derived from the official OV-10X proposal by Boeing from 2009 for the USAF's Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance requirement. Initially, Boeing proposed to re-start OV-10 manufacture, but this was deemed uneconomical, due to the expected small production number of new serial aircraft, so the “Black Pony” program became a modernization project. In consequence, all airframes for the "new" MV-10Hs were recovered OV-10s of various types from the "boneyard" at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.
While the revamped aircraft would maintain much of its 1960s-vintage rugged external design, modernizations included a completely new, armored central fuselage with a highly modified cockpit section, ejection seats and a computerized glass cockpit. The “Black Pony” OV-10 had full dual controls, so that either crewmen could steer the aircraft while the other operated sensors and/or weapons. This feature would also improve survivability in case of incapacitation of a crew member as the result from a hit.
The cockpit armor protected the crew and many vital systems from 23mm shells and shrapnel (e. g. from MANPADS). The crew still sat in tandem under a common, generously glazed canopy with flat, bulletproof panels for reduced sun reflections, with the pilot in the front seat and an observer/WSO behind. The Bronco’s original cargo capacity and the rear door were retained, even though the extra armor and defensive measures like chaff/flare dispensers as well as an additional fuel cell in the central fuselage limited the capacity. However, it was still possible to carry and deploy personnel, e. g. small special ops teams of up to four when the aircraft flew in clean configuration.
Additional updates for the MV-10H included structural reinforcements for a higher AUW and higher g load maneuvers, similar to OV-10D+ standards. The landing gear was also reinforced, and the aircraft kept its ability to operate from short, improvised airstrips. A fixed refueling probe was added to improve range and loiter time.
Intelligence sensors and smart weapon capabilities included a FLIR sensor and a laser range finder/target designator, both mounted in a small turret on the aircraft’s nose. The MV-10H was also outfitted with a data link and the ability to carry an integrated targeting pod such as the Northrop Grumman LITENING or the Lockheed Martin Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP). Also included was the Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver (ROVER) to provide live sensor data and video recordings to personnel on the ground.
To improve overall performance and to better cope with the higher empty weight of the modified aircraft as well as with operations under hot-and-high conditions, the engines were beefed up. The new General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines improved the Bronco's performance considerably: top speed increased by 100 mph (160 km/h), the climb rate was tripled (a weak point of early OV-10s despite the type’s good STOL capability) and both take-off as well as landing run were almost halved. The new engines called for longer nacelles, and their circular diameter markedly differed from the former Garrett T76-G-420/421 turboprop engines. To better exploit the additional power and reduce the aircraft’s audio signature, reversible contraprops, each with eight fiberglass blades, were fitted. These allowed a reduced number of revolutions per minute, resulting in less noise from the blades and their tips, while the engine responsiveness was greatly improved. The CT7-9Ds’ exhausts were fitted with muzzlers/air mixers to further reduce the aircraft's noise and heat signature.
Another novel and striking feature was the addition of so-called “tip sails” to the wings: each wingtip was elongated with a small, cigar-shaped fairing, each carrying three staggered, small “feather blade” winglets. Reputedly, this installation contributed ~10% to the higher climb rate and improved lift/drag ratio by ~6%, improving range and loiter time, too.
Drawing from the Iraq experience as well as from the USMC’s NOGS test program with a converted OV-10D as a night/all-weather gunship/reconnaissance platform, the MV-10H received a heavier gun armament: the original four light machine guns that were only good for strafing unarmored targets were deleted and their space in the sponsons replaced by avionics. Instead, the aircraft was outfitted with a lightweight M197 three-barrel 20mm gatling gun in a chin turret. This could be fixed in a forward position at high speed or when carrying forward-firing ordnance under the stub wings, or it could be deployed to cover a wide field of fire under the aircraft when it was flying slower, being either slaved to the FLIR or to a helmet sighting auto targeting system.
The original seven hardpoints were retained (1x ventral, 2x under each sponson, and another pair under the outer wings), but the total ordnance load was slightly increased and an additional pair of launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinders or other light AAMs under the wing tips were added – not only as a defensive measure, but also with an anti-helicopter role in mind; four more Sidewinders could be carried on twin launchers under the outer wings against aerial targets. Other guided weapons cleared for the MV-10H were the light laser-guided AGR-20A and AGM-119 Hellfire missiles, the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System upgrade to the light Hydra 70 rockets, the new Laser Guided Zuni Rocket which had been cleared for service in 2010, TV-/IR-/laser-guided AGM-65 Maverick AGMs and AGM-122 Sidearm anti-radar missiles, plus a wide range of gun and missile pods, iron and cluster bombs, as well as ECM and flare/chaff pods, which were not only carried defensively, but also in order to disrupt enemy ground communication.
In this configuration, a contract for the conversion of twelve mothballed American Broncos to the new MV-10H standard was signed with Boeing in 2016, and the first MV-10H was handed over to the USAF in early 2018, with further deliveries lasting into early 2020. All machines were allocated to the newly founded 919th Special Operations Support Squadron at Duke Field (Florida). This unit was part of the 919th Special Operations Wing, an Air Reserve Component (ARC) of the United States Air Force. It was assigned to the Tenth Air Force of Air Force Reserve Command and an associate unit of the 1st Special Operations Wing, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). If mobilized the wing was gained by AFSOC (Air Force Special Operations Command) to support Special Tactics, the U.S. Air Force's special operations ground force. Similar in ability and employment to Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC), U.S. Army Special Forces and U.S. Navy SEALs, Air Force Special Tactics personnel were typically the first to enter combat and often found themselves deep behind enemy lines in demanding, austere conditions, usually with little or no support.
The MV-10Hs are expected to provide support for these ground units in the form of all-weather reconnaissance and observation, close air support and also forward air control duties for supporting ground units. Precision ground strikes and protection from enemy helicopters and low-flying aircraft were other, secondary missions for the modernized Broncos, which are expected to serve well into the 2040s. Exports or conversions of foreign OV-10s to the Black Pony standard are not planned, though.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 42 ft 2½ in (12,88 m) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 45 ft 10½ in(14 m) incl. tip sails
Height: 15 ft 2 in (4.62 m)
Wing area: 290.95 sq ft (27.03 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 64A315
Empty weight: 9,090 lb (4,127 kg)
Gross weight: 13,068 lb (5,931 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 17,318 lb (7,862 kg)
Powerplant:
2× General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines, 1,305 kW (1,750 hp) each,
driving 8-bladed Hamilton Standard 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m) diameter constant-speed,
fully feathering, reversible contra-rotating propellers with metal hub and composite blades
Performance:
Maximum speed: 390 mph (340 kn, 625 km/h)
Combat range: 198 nmi (228 mi, 367 km)
Ferry range: 1,200 nmi (1,400 mi, 2,200 km) with auxiliary fuel
Maximum loiter time: 5.5 h with auxiliary fuel
Service ceiling: 32.750 ft (10,000 m)
13,500 ft (4.210 m) on one engine
Rate of climb: 17.400 ft/min (48 m/s) at sea level
Take-off run: 480 ft (150 m)
740 ft (227 m) to 50 ft (15 m)
1,870 ft (570 m) to 50 ft (15 m) at MTOW
Landing run: 490 ft (150 m)
785 ft (240 m) at MTOW
1,015 ft (310 m) from 50 ft (15 m)
Armament:
1x M197 3-barreled 20 mm Gatling cannon in a chin turret with 750 rounds ammo capacity
7x hardpoints for a total load of 5.000 lb (2,270 kg)
2x wingtip launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional Bronco update/conversion was simply spawned by the idea: could it be possible to replace the original cockpit section with one from an AH-1 Cobra, for a kind of gunship version?
The basis is the Academy OV-10D kit, mated with the cockpit section from a Fujimi AH-1S TOW Cobra (Revell re-boxing, though), chosen because of its “boxy” cockpit section with flat glass panels – I think that it conveys the idea of an armored cockpit section best. Combining these parts was not easy, though, even though the plan sound simple. Initially, the Bronco’s twin booms, wings and stabilizer were built separately, because this made PSR on these sections easier than trying the same on a completed airframe. One of the initial challenges: the different engines. I wanted something uprated, and a different look, and I had a pair of (excellent!) 1:144 resin engines from the Russian company Kompakt Zip for a Tu-95 bomber at hand, which come together with movable(!) eight-blade contraprops that were an almost perfect size match for the original three-blade props. Biggest problem: the Tu-95 nacelles have a perfectly circular diameter, while the OV-10’s booms are square and rectangular. Combining these parts and shapes was already a messy PST affair, but it worked out quite well – even though the result rather reminds of some Chinese upgrade measure (anyone know the Tu-4 copies with turboprops? This here looks similar!). But while not pretty, I think that the beafier look works well and adds to the idea of a “revived” aircraft. And you can hardly beat the menacing look of contraprops on anything...
The exotic, so-called “tip sails” on the wings, mounted on short booms, are a detail borrowed from the Shijiazhuang Y-5B-100, an updated Chinese variant/copy of the Antonov An-2 biplane transporter. The booms are simple pieces of sprue from the Bronco kit, the winglets were cut from 0.5mm styrene sheet.
For the cockpit donor, the AH-1’s front section was roughly built, including the engine section (which is a separate module, so that the basic kit can be sold with different engine sections), and then the helicopter hull was cut and trimmed down to match the original Bronco pod and to fit under the wing. This became more complicated than expected, because a) the AH-1 cockpit and the nose are considerably shorter than the OV-10s, b) the AH-1 fuselage is markedly taller than the Bronco’s and c) the engine section, which would end up in the area of the wing, features major recesses, making the surface very uneven – calling for massive PSR to even this out. PSR was also necessary to hide the openings for the Fujimi AH-1’s stub wings. Other issues: the front landing gear (and its well) had to be added, as well as the OV-10 wing stubs. Furthermore, the new cockpit pod’s rear section needed an aerodynamical end/fairing, but I found a leftover Academy OV-10 section from a build/kitbashing many moons ago. Perfect match!
All these challenges could be tackled, even though the AH-1 cockpit looks surprisingly stout and massive on the Bronco’s airframe - the result looks stockier than expected, but it works well for the "Gunship" theme. Lots of PSR went into the new central fuselage section, though, even before it was mated with the OV-10 wing and the rest of the model.
Once cockpit and wing were finally mated, the seams had to disappear under even more PSR and a spinal extension of the canopy had to be sculpted across the upper wing surface, which would meld with the pod’s tail in a (more or less) harmonious shape. Not an easy task, and the fairing was eventually sculpted with 2C putty, plus even more PSR… Looks quite homogenous, though.
After this massive body work, other hardware challenges appeared like small distractions. The landing gear was another major issue because the deeper AH-1 section lowered the ground clearance, also because of the chin turret. To counter this, I raised the OV-10’s main landing gear by ~2mm – not much, but it was enough to create a credible stance, together with the front landing gear transplant under the cockpit, which received an internal console to match the main landing gear’s length. Due to the chin turret and the shorter nose, the front wheel retracts backwards now. But this looks quite plausible, thanks to the additional space under the cockpit tub, which also made a belt feed for the gun’s ammunition supply believable.
To enhance the menacing look I gave the model a fixed refueling boom, made from 1mm steel wire and a receptor adapter sculpted with white glue. The latter stuff was also used add some antenna fairings around the hull. Some antennae, chaff dispensers and an IR decoy were taken from the Academy kit.
The ordnance came from various sources. The Sidewinders under the wing tips were taken from an Italeri F-16C/D kit, they look better than the missiles from the Academy Bronco kit. Their launch rails came from an Italeri Bae Hawk 200. The quadruple Hellfire launchers on the underwing hardpoints were left over from an Italeri AH-1W, and they are a perfect load for this aircraft and its role. The LAU-10 and -19 missile pods on the stub wings were taken from the OV-10 kit.
Painting and markings:
Finding a suitable and somewhat interesting – but still plausible – paint scheme was not easy. Taking the A-10 as benchmark, an overall light grey livery (with focus on low contrast against the sky as protection against ground fire) would have been a likely choice – and in fact the last operational American OV-10s were painted in this fashion. But in order to provide a different look I used the contemporary USAF V-22Bs and Special Operations MC-130s as benchmark, which typically carry a darker paint scheme consisting of FS 36118 (suitably “Gunship Gray” :D) from above, FS 36375 underneath, with a low, wavy waterline, plus low-viz markings. Not spectacular, but plausible – and very similar to the late r/w Colombian OV-10s.
The cockpit tub became Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231, Humbrol 140) and the landing gear white (Revell 301).
The model received an overall black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, to liven up the dull all-grey livery. The decals were gathered from various sources, and I settled for black USAF low-viz markings. The “stars and bars” come from a late USAF F-4, the “IP” tail code was tailored from F-16 markings and the shark mouth was taken from an Academy AH-64. Most stencils came from another Academy OV-10 sheet and some other sources.
Decals were also used to create the trim on the propeller blades and markings on the ordnance.
Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and some exhaust soot stains were added with graphite along the tail boom flanks.
A successful transplantation – but is this still a modified Bronco or already a kitbashing? The result looks quite plausible and menacing, even though the TOW Cobra front section appears relatively massive. But thanks to the bigger engines and extended wing tips the proportions still work. The large low-pressure tires look a bit goofy under the aircraft, but they are original. The grey livery works IMHO well, too – a more colorful or garish scheme would certainly have distracted from the modified technical basis.
I got this for the X100T today. I'm hoping it will be good for portraits. Also, I've always preferred 50mm so this should be a good choice for me.
This building used to be South Kentish Town station and is now occupied by a bar, a massage parlour and a Cash Converters.
iPhone 4 + Snapseed.
Placa Patente: RR1023
Año: 1997
País de Origen: Brasil
En lo que terminó este Carguito, de ser un 4x2 ahora es un faenero 8x2 jeje, muy buena conversión ! sumado a eso deben haberlo alargado para añadirle 2 ejes mas...
Upper Lakes' Red Wing is downbound approaching the Soo Locks in September 1975. She was rebuilt from a T2 tanker.
2D-3D conversion done with SPM. Web image from www.ricoholmes.com. Red/Cyan filtered 3D glasses required for viewing.
A British radio from the late 1960s, early 1970s featuring four valves (tubes) single conversion - the MkII replaced a valve rectifier with solid state diodes.
With performance like this, it's no wonder the Americans and then the Japanese stole the market! I made a transistor superhet in the early 1970s from a design in Practical Wireless which performed better than this radio.
It's in fine mechanical condition, maybe a bit of "fettling up" will improve the performance, but I think it is basically an unremarkable design. You can only expect so much from a four-valve circuit.
There is no way you could use this for amateur communications when coupled with a transmitter, except perhaps on Top Band AM at a pinch ... Nice looking radio, though!
Described as a "communications receiver" in advertisements at the time - that's stretching the point a wee bit, in my view.
Circuit configuration :-
ECH81 "Classic" Triode/Heptode frequency changer (no RF stage)
EF183 IF Amplifier
OA81Germanium diode envelope detector (no product detector for SSB/CW)
12AT7 Audio preamp/AF output (dual valve)
12AT7 BFO/S Meter driver (dual valve)
Silicon diode rectifier for HT supply.
Rugby Top 14
Stade Toulousain vs. Clermont (26:20)
Toulouse, France
First try out sports with the Sony RX100 Mk. III
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The J, K and N class was a class of destroyers of the Royal Navy, launched in 1938 in three flotillas or groups and with names beginning with "J", "K" and "N", respectively. Their design was intended as a smaller follow-on from the preceding Tribal class and incorporated one radical new idea that was a departure from all previous Royal Navy destroyer designs: the adoption of a two-boiler room layout. This reduced hull length and allowed for a single funnel, both reducing the profile and increasing the arcs of fire of the light anti-aircraft (AA) weapons. However, this also increased vulnerability, as there were now two adjacent large compartments with the resultant risk of a single well-placed hit flooding both and resulting in a total loss of boiler power. This illustrates somewhat the Admiralty's attitude to the expendable nature of destroyers, but destroyers were lightly armored and fast vessels, anyway, meant to survive by avoiding being hit at all. From this perspective, the odds of a single hit striking just the right spot to disable both boiler rooms simultaneously were considered remote enough to be worth risking in exchange for the benefits given by a two-room layout.
A significant advancement in construction techniques was developed by naval architect Albert Percy Cole. Instead of going for transverse frame sections which were unnecessarily strong, but held together by weak longitudinals, Cole opted for extra strong longitudinals and weaker transverse frames. Another advancement was changes to the bow design, which was modified from that of the preceding Tribal-class design: the clipper bow was replaced by a straight stem with increased sheer. This change was not a success and these ships were very wet forwards. This shortcoming was rectified from the later S class onward by returning to the earlier form.
Despite the vulnerability of the boiler layout, the design was to prove compact, strong and very successful, forming the basis of all Royal Navy destroyer construction from the O class up to the last of the C class of 1943–1945.
The armament was based on that of the Tribals but replaced one twin QF 4.7 in (120 mm) Mark XII (L/45) gun on mounting CP Mk. XIX with an additional bank of torpedo tubes. These mountings were capable of 40° elevation and 340° of training. Curiously, 'X' mounting was positioned such that the blind 20° arc was across the stern, rather than the more logical forward position where fire was obscured by the bridge and masts anyway. This meant that they were unable to fire dead astern. With the tubes now 'pentad', a heavy load of ten Mk. IX torpedoes could be carried. AA armament consisted of a quadruple QF 2 pdr gun Mark VIII on a Mk. VII mounting and a pair of quadruple 0.5 in Vickers machine guns, which were later replaced with more effective 20 mm Oerlikons.
These ships, when completed, had a comparatively heavy close-range AA armament. Fire control arrangements also differed from the Tribals, and the dedicated high-angle (H/A) rangefinder director was not fitted. Instead only a 12 ft (3.7 m) rangefinder was carried behind the nominally dual-purpose Director Control Tower (DCT). In the event, the rangefinder was heavily modified to allow it to control the main armament for AA fire and was known as the "3 man modified rangefinder". These ships used the Fuze Keeping Clock HA Fire Control Computer.
In 1940 and 1941, to improve the anti-aircraft capabilities, the ships had their aft torpedo tubes removed and replaced with a single 4” gun QF Mark V on a HA Mark III mounting. The relatively ineffective multiple 0.5-inch (12.7 mm) machine guns were replaced with single 20 mm Oerlikons, with a further pair added abreast the searchlight platform amidships. The high-speed destroyer mine sweeps were replaced with a rack and two throwers for 45 depth charges, and a Type 286 Radar air warning was added at the masthead alongside Type 285 fire control on the H/A rangefinder-director.
H.M.S. Jubilant was the last J-class destroyer to be ordered in March 1937, and she was the last one to be built, by Harland & Wolff at Belfast, Northern Ireland. Her keel was laid down on 30 May 1937. She was launched on 15 October 1939, and commissioned 13 November 1939.
Initially, Jubilant was allocated to the Home Fleet and arrived at Portsmouth on 11 January 1940 and carried a uniform light grey livery. On 3 February she left for the River Clyde en route to Rosyth, arrived on 7 February and operated with the 2nd Cruiser Squadron on convoy escort duties.
In April and May 1940, she took part in the Norwegian Campaign. On 11 April Jubilant ran aground off Fleinvær while hunting German merchant ships entering the Vestfjord. Her boiler room was flooded, and she was holed forward. Overall damage was limited, though, and she was successfully towed to Skjelfjord where an advanced base had been improvised. Despite air attacks, temporary repairs were made, and she was towed home a month later. She arrived at Greenock in Scotland on 16 May 1940 where additional temporary repairs were carried out, before proceeding on 19 August to the Tyne for permanent repairs and major modifications.
These modifications centered around the experimental outfit of the destroyer with heaver 6 in guns. The idea behind the bigger guns was to give the ship not only higher firepower in direct confrontation, but even more a bigger range for ballistic shots, so that the ship could support major battleships in land target shelling missions. Being lighter than cruisers with the same type of weapon that were typically tasked with this kind of mission and benefiting from less draught, the light destroyer could operate closer to enemy shores, and its higher speed and agility would offer sufficient protection from counter fire. The Admiralty was interested enough in the concept to allow a ship to be converted as a pilot for field tests, and Jubilant was chosen for the conversion.
This resulted in a thoroughly revised main armament, which now experimentally consisted of four single QF Mk. III 6-inch 40 caliber naval guns in fully enclosed turrets, which replaced the J-class’s former three QF 4.7-inch twin gun mounts. The QF Mk. III 6-inch guns were leftover stock material from wrecked WWI cruisers, and they had an effective range of up to 15,000 yards (14,000 m) at 28° elevation versus 12,000 yards (11,000 m) at 24° of the former 4.7 in guns. They were the heaviest type of gun that a British destroyer had carried so far, and the concept was later further explored with the L- and M-class ships, even though these would be outfitted with more modern weapons.
For the new configuration, “A” and “B” turrets were simply replaced, but for the rear-facing “X” and “Y” stations, the rear deck and superstructure had to be modified. The AA ordnance was re-arranged and modernized, too, including the replacement of the rear torpedo launcher unit with a single QF 4-inch Mark V (102 mm) AA gun with a circular splinter protection wall, which was part of the contemporary standard upgrade program for the J- and K-class ships. 20mm Oerlikon guns (in single and twin mounts) replaced the former 0.5 in machine guns, and two depth charge launchers were added amidships.
Other changes comprised a closed bridge for better crew protection and a new coincidence rangefinder, optimized for ballistic gunnery. A Type 279M radar was fitted, too, a naval early-warning radar developed during the war from the Type 79 metric early-warning set. It initially had separate transmitting and receiving antennas that were later combined into single-antenna operation. This set also had a secondary surface-search mode with surface and aerial gunnery capability and used a Precision Ranging Panel, which passed accurate radar ranges directly to the HACS table, an analog computer.
After repairs and trials were completed in August 1941, Jubilant reappeared as 'a new ship from the water line down', carrying a disruptive light Admiralty scheme in greys and blue, and she returned to Scapa Flow on 17 August 1941. On 9 September she left Greenock, escorting the battleship Duke of York to Rosyth. Later that month she was employed in patrolling the Iceland–Faroes passage to intercept enemy surface ships.
On 6 October 1941 Jubilant left Hvalfjord, Iceland, together with the battleships Penelope and King George V, escorting the aircraft carrier Victorious for the successful Operation E. J., an air attack on German shipping between Glom Fjord and the head of West Fjord, Norway. The force returned to Scapa Flow on 10 October 1941.
Jubilant was then assigned to Force K based at Malta and departed Scapa on 12 October 1941, arriving in Malta on 21 October, where she received a distinctive camouflage in then-popular Mountbatten Pink that – in a rather uncommon fashion – retained some remnants of her former livery. On 8 November, she sailed together with two cruisers and other escorting destroyers from Malta to intercept an Italian convoy of six destroyers and seven merchant ships sailing for Libya. During the ensuing Battle of the Duisburg Convoy on 9 November off Cape Spartivento, the British sank one enemy destroyer (Fulmine) and all of the merchant ships.
On 23 November, Force K sailed again to intercept another enemy convoy and sank two more merchant ships west of Crete the next day. On 1 December 1941, Force K sank the Italian merchant vessel Adriatico, the destroyer Alvise da Mosto, and the tanker Iridio Mantovani.
On 19 December, while operating off Tripoli, Jubilant struck a mine but was not seriously damaged, although the cruiser Neptune and the destroyer H.M.S. Kandahar were sunk by mines in the same action. Jubilant was sent into the dockyard for repairs and returned to service at the beginning of January 1942, still wearing her distinctive pink-blue livery. On 5 January, she left Malta with Force K, escorting the Special Service Vessel Glengyle to Alexandria (Operation ME9), returning on 27 January, escorting the supply ship Breconshire. She left Malta, again with Breconshire on 13 February 1942 and an eastbound convoy aided by five other destroyers, Operation MG5, returning to Malta on 15 February, with the destroyers Lance and Legion. On 23 March, she left Malta with Legion for Operation MG1, a further convoy to Malta. Breconshire was hit and taken in tow by Jubilant and was later safely secured to a buoy in Marsaxlokk harbor.
Jubilant was holed both forward and aft by near-misses during air attacks on Malta on 26 March. While in the island, she was docked and repaired at the Malta Dry Docks. Day after day she was attacked by German aircraft and the crew worked to fix a myriad of shrapnel holes, so many that she was nicknamed H.M.S. Colander, and when these had been plugged with long pieces of wood, H.M.S. Urchin. In this guise she sailed for Gibraltar on 8 April and on the next day was repeatedly attacked from the air. She arrived in Gibraltar on 10 April, with further damage from near-misses. The damage was extensive and would have required several months at home after temporary repairs in Gibraltar. Eventually, Jubilant's repairs had been reconsidered, and it was then decided to send her to the United States for a major overhaul. She accordingly left Gibraltar on 10 May 1942, for the Navy Yard at New York via Bermuda, arriving on 19 May. She was under repair until September and arrived in Norfolk, Virginia on 15 September, proceeding, again via Bermuda, to Portsmouth, England, which she reached on 1 October 1942.
Jubilant arrived back at Scapa Flow on 2 December, now carrying a dark disruptive Admiralty scheme consisting of green and grey tones and remained in home waters until the middle of January 1943. Then she left the Clyde on 17 January for Gibraltar, where she arrived on 22 January. She had been allocated to the 12th Cruiser Squadron, in which she operated with the Western Mediterranean Fleet under the flag of Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham during the follow-up of Operation Operation Torch, the landings in North Africa. In the new theatre of operation, Jubilant received once more a new camouflage, this time a high contrast scheme consisting of very light grey and black.
On 1 June 1943, Jubilant could finally be deployed on a mission that she had been re-designed for. Together with the destroyers Paladin and Petard she shelled the Italian island of Pantelleria, during which her 6 in QF guns proved to be very effective. The force received enemy gunfire in return and Jubilant was hit once but suffered only little damage. On 8 June 1943, with the cruiser Newfoundland and other ships, she took part in a further heavy bombardment of the island. A demand for its surrender was refused. The same force left Malta on 10 June, to cover the assault (Operation Corkscrew), which resulted in the surrender of the island on 11 June 1943. On 11 and 12 June Jubilant also took part in the attack on Lampedusa, which fell to the British forces on 12 June 1943.
On 10 July 1943, with Aurora and two other destroyers, Jubilant carried out a diversionary bombardment of Catania as part of Operation Husky, the Allied invasion of Sicily. The flotilla then moved to Taormina where the railway station was shelled. On 11 July, Jubilant left Malta with the 12th Cruiser Squadron as part of Force H to provide cover for the northern flank of the assault on Sicily. During the remainder of July and August, she took part in various other naval gunfire support and sweeps during the campaign for Sicily.
On 9 September 1943, Jubilant was part of Force Q for Operation Avalanche, the allied landings at Salerno, Italy, during which she augmented the bombardment force. Jubilant left the Salerno area on 26 September at the beginning of October was transferred to the Levant in view of a possible attack on the island of Kos in the Dodecanese. On 7 October, with the cruiser Sirius and other ships, she sank six enemy landing craft, one ammunition ship and an armed trawler off Stampalia. While the ships were retiring through the Scarpanto Straits south of Rhodes, they were attacked by Ju 87 "Stuka" dive-bombers, but, although damaged by a bomb, Jubilant was able to return to Alexandria at 22 kn (25 mph; 41 km/h) and avoid further hits.
On 19 November 1943 the ship moved to Haifa in connection with possible developments in the Lebanon situation. Towards the end of 1943, she was ordered to Gibraltar for Operation Stonewall, anti-blockade-runner duties, in the Atlantic. On 27 December, the forces in this operation destroyed the German blockade-runner Alsterufer, which was sunk by aircraft co-operating with Royal Navy ships. Jubilant returned to Gibraltar on 30 December and took part in Operation Shingle, the amphibious assault on Anzio, Italy, providing gunfire support as part of Force X with USS Brooklyn on 22 January 1944. She also assisted in the bombardments in the Formia area during the later operations.
On 18 February 1944, Jubilant was leaving Naples to return to the Anzio area when she was torpedoed by the German submarine U-410. A torpedo struck her in the engine room and was followed sixteen minutes later by another torpedo that hit in the boiler room, causing her immediate sinking; 97 of the crew, including the captain, went down with the ship and 86 survived.
General characteristics:
Displacement: 1,690 long tons (1,720 t) (standard)
2,330 long tons (2,370 t) (deep load)
Length: 356 ft 6 in (108.7 m) overall
Beam: 35 ft 9 in (10.9 m)
Draught: 12 ft 6 in (3.8 m) (deep)
Draft: 17.5 ft (5.3 m)
Complement: 178
Propulsion:
2× Admiralty 3-drum boilers with geared steam turbines, developing 44,000 shp (33,000 kW)
Performance:
Top speed: 36 knots (67 km/h; 41 mph)
Range: 5,500 nmi (10,200 km; 6,300 mi) at 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph)
Armament:
4× QF 6-inch Mark III (150 mm) 40 caliber guns
1× QF 4-inch Mark V (102 mm) AA gun
1× twin 20 mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft machine cannon
2× single 20 mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft machine cannon
1× quintuple 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tube
2× throwers and 1× rack astern with 30 depth charges
The kit and its assembly:
Again, this is a modified H.M.S. Kelly from Matchbox, this time even an original boxing. The main motivation was a livery in/with Mountbatten Pink, though. As a side note, “H.M.S. Jubilant” was not built, but it was the name of the last J-class cruiser. It had been ordered in 1937, but the ship was cancelled in December 1937.
Even though I wanted to keep things simple, I found some spare parts that justified modifications. For instance, I had four turrets from my recent USS Fletcher conversion left and decided to integrate them into the British destroyer, posing as single but bigger caliber guns. For a staggered position of the two rear gun stations, I used the short rear cabin that the Matchbox kit offers as optional part and added a console on the rear deck for the Y turret. The X turret was placed on top of the cabin, just like the original gun mount.
The AA ordnance was modified, too. The 4 in GF gun instead of the rear torpedo mount is OOB and an optional part. The original quad (and pretty clumsy) 4x 0.5” AA machine gun amidships was replaced with a twin gun s from an Aoshima 1:700 ship weapon set. This is originally intended for Japanese ships, but it’s whifworld, after all, and many weapon stations look quite similar to their British counterparts.
For a slightly different silhouette I gave the bridge a roof, cut from 1.5 and 0.5 mm styrene sheet, and re-arranged the directors and searchlight station on top of it. I also added a radar antenna array to the upper mast.
As an extra I added some rigging to the mast, made from heated plastic sprue material – simple, but it improves the model’s look considerably.
Painting and markings:
The more exotic part, at least visually. Mountbatten Pink, also called Plymouth Pink, was a naval camouflage color resembling greyish mauve – it was not a bright pinkish tone, rather a pragmatic mix of light grey (whatever was at hand) with red lead underwater primer, which had a yellow-ish touch, much like brick red. The paint was first used by Lord Mountbatten of the British Royal Navy during World War II, hence its name. After noticing a Union-Castle Line ship with a similar camouflage color disappearing from sight, he applied the color to his own ships, believing the paint would render them difficult to see esp. during dawn and dusk, daytimes when ships were highly vulnerable. However, the pink shade was more popular than effective. While the color was met with anecdotal success, it was judged by experts to be just equivalent to neutral greys at best and would make ships with the color more obvious under certain conditions at worst. However, for some time and esp. in the MTO, the color was very popular and widely applied to all kinds of ships.
Most of the time, RN ships were painted overall with this tone. Later, the application became more refined and the superstructures above deck received a lighter shade than the lower hull, lowering the contrast above the horizon. Sometimes, Mountbatten pink was integrated into Admiralty multi-color schemes. One of these rather rare cases was H.M.S. Anchusa. This was a Flower class corvette, which carried a medium blue grey (rumored to be B20) panel amidships, with the rest being uniform medium pink. As a side note: there’s a 1:350 model of this ship available, and it’s funny to see how different modelers interpret the pink shade, ranging from a pale grey with only a slight pinkish hue to a deep, purplish brick red! However, Anchusa became the conceptual basis for my Jubilant livery. Another inspiration was H.M.S. Kenya, a Crown Colony-class cruiser, which carried a more complex/disruptive scheme in two shades of Mountbatton Pink, using two shades of the pink tone on the hull and superstructures for a shortening effect with lighter areas at bow and stern. This livery had earned the ship around 1942 the nickname "The Pink Lady".
The combination of both inspirations became a four-tone scheme with low contrast, with two shades of pink and two of bluish grey. The pink tones were both mixed with Humbrol 70 and 129, with slightly different ratios for the lighter and darker shades. I generally went for lighter tones, due to the model’s small size and the fact that there apparently was no clear definition of the Mountbatten pink tones. The bluish tones were supposed to be contemporary B5 and B6, guesstimated with Humbrol 128 (which appears quite greenish in the surrounding pink context!) and a mix of Humbrol 47 and 96. The latter turned out to look brighter/less grayish than expected, but I left it that way because the mix blended well with the other colors. The scheme looks quite exotic, but could have worked well due to the little contrast between the different colors and the overall dull impression.
The deck was painted with Revell 47, simulating a painted wooden deck with 507b. Horizontal metal surfaces on the upper decks as well as the tops of the turrets were painted with the same color. Lifeboats and rafts became light grey, as if taken over from a former camouflage and for some contrast to the rest of the ship.
The model was painted in separate elements and slightly weathered with a highly thinned black ink wash and some Sienna Brown water color for rust stains here and there. The many, well-visible portholes along the hull and on the superstructures were added with a thin felt tip pen. A similar pen was used to create the boot topping and the muzzles on the guns and torpedo launchers. Finally, the kit segments were sealed with a coat of acrylic matt varnish before final assembly and rigging.
With the experience from the recent build of the same kit, work on this one was surprisingly easy and quick, and I was happy that I had spare parts at hand to change the look of the ship at least a little. The camouflage looks interesting - one can assume that it was manned by unicorns and that glitter steams in clouds out of the funnel. But in the end I find the pink/blue scheme to be quite effective, esp. in low light and also in front of land background. It's not a confusion approach, even though the blue divider seems to separate the ship into two parts, when seen in front of a proper environment, but as a concealment measure the paint mix works IMHO surprisingly well.
This model was specifically built for the Arawasi Wild Eagles blog's "Hayabusa Model Contest" in April/May 2017 (arawasi-wildeagles.blogspot.de/2017/03/japanese-aircraft-...) - and it is the guesstimate, based on a conversion set and a vague frontal picture of a real aircraft.
Inspiration struck when I came across a Rising Decals conversion (from the Czech Republic)set for an experimental Ki43 with wooden, retractable skis - tested in Manchuria in 1944. The set comes with finely crafted and moulded resin skis, plus a decal sheet for the rather bleak aircraft in natural metal finish. Anyway, I found the idea worth to become an entry, and took action.
The kit and its assembly:
The basis is the venarable 1:72 Hasegawa kit of the Ki43-II, a simple kit with good detail and fit, even though you get raised (though very fine) panel lines. The kit was basically built OOB, with only some detail additions in the cockpit, and I modified the wings and lower fuselage in so far that the "butterfly flaps" were added in extended position.
Concerning the ski landing gear, I did some legwork, and eventually found a Ki43-II with the same landing gear arrangement as the conversion set, but it also featured a four-bladed propeller!
The wheeled landing gear was simply replaced by the resin struts from the conversion set, the skis are separate pieces that fit neatly into each other and into the kit.
The propeller was scratched from the three OOB blades, plus a trimmed donor blade. The spinner is the front end of a German 250 kg bomb. Inside of the engine, a styrene tube was added as propeller mount, which received a long metal axis.
A venturi tube was added under the fuselage, too, and the canopy separated into two pieces for better display.
The frontal benchmark picture of "my" Ki43-II shows the aircraft in clean configuration, but I decided to use/add the underwing tanks in order to avoid filling the respective holes in the wings - and it makes the aircraft look more interesting, IMHO.
Painting and markings:
Concerning the aircraft's livery, I basically stuck to the machine depicted in the conversion set and on the few pictures of such machines - even though the info sheet states that "markings are uncertain".
Anyway, I went the suggested overall NMF route with grey-green fabric (individually mixed from Humbrol 90 and 155) on all rudder surfaces. As a personal note, and as an interpretation of the benchmark photograph of the Ki43-II I tried to build, the model received a worn and flaking cowling in IJA Green and Grey. The latter was also used for the drop tanks, with red primer showing through the tanks' front end. A black anti glare panel was added in front of and behind the canopy.
The cockpit interior was painted, based on Hasegawa's recommendations, in a greenish brown tone (a mix of Revell 45 and 16). The landing gear wells and the interior of the flaps was painted with Aodake Iro - and instead of mixing a metallic blue tone as a single tone I rather laid down an Aluminum base and added a clear, greenish blue lacquer on top - just like the real thing. The deep yellow ID markings on the wings' leading edges were painted with RAL 1028 (Lufthansa Gelb, Revell 310).
The skis appear to be massive wood pieces, and they were painted accordingly with a wet-in-wet mix of red brown and cream, for a streaky look, mimicking the wooden structure.
After basic painting (a basic coat with acrylic Aluminum, Revell 99), everything done with brushes and minimal masking, the kit received a light black ink wash, in order to emphasize engravings. For some "depth" effect, panels were post-shaded with Polished Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol 27002) on top of the acrylic Aluminum base. During the polishing process with a piece of soft cloth, some grinded graphite was rubbed over all surfaces, too, creating a slightly worn and uneven look. This little trick also enhances the metallic shine of the surface, making it look less "painted". Graphite was also used in order to simulate light exhaust stains on the Hayabusa's flanks.
Once the (very thin and delicate) decals were in place, they received a light treatment with Aluminium and sand paper, in order to simulate some wear on the aircraft's surface. Finally, everything was sealed with a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish, just the rudders and the anti-glare panels received a completely matt coat.
A quick build, done in less than three days from sprues to photo shots. Anyway, the model should rather be regarded as fictional, since my information basis has been rather corny and relied on very limited references. But I am, nevertheless, happy with the result, and I hope the model conveys the original idea of the converted Ki43 with skis?
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Supermarine Jetfire was a stopgap solution in order to introduce a jet-powered interceptor agains German V-1 missiles that threatened the London region from June 1944 on. At that time, the only aircraft with the low-altitude speed to be effective against it was the Hawker Tempest, but fewer than 30 Tempests were available. They were assigned to No. 150 Wing RAF, and early attempts to intercept and destroy V-1s often failed.
One alternative was the jet-powered Gloster Meteor, which still was development - and in order to get the new engine into service (also as a response to Gloster's engagement for E.1/44 with the single-engine "Ace" fighter) Supermarine responded with the idea to replace the nose-mounted piston engine with a single Whittle W.2 engine: The "Jetfire" was born.
The conversion was rather simple: the Jetfire was actually a Griffon-powered Spitfire XIV with as few changes to the original airframe in order to accept the W.2. The aircraft's forward fuselage was widened to accommodate the bulbous engine with a simple nose intake. The deeper forward part of the fuselage with its round diameter gave the aircraft a pronounced "pod-and-boom" configuration.
Internally, the front wing spar had to be bent into an inverted U-shape to clear the engine and its jet pipe.
The W.2 was mounted slightly angled downwards, and the jet pipe was bifurcated so that it ran along the fuselage flanks above the wings, with an exhaust just behind the wings’ trailing edges. To protect the fuselage, steel heatshield were added to the flanks. Furthermore, the former radiator fairings for the Griffon and the respective plumbing were removed and faired over, saving weight and internal space – and weight was reduced as much as possible to achieve a decent performance with the rather experimental centrifugal jet engine. The conventional Spitfire tailsitter landing gear remained unmodified, just additional covers for the main wheels were added for improved aerodynamics at high speed.
The first prototype was already finished in October 1944, and taxiing trials started immediately. The heatshields proved to be too short and the heat from the engine exhaust melted the duralumin skin of the rear fuselage. Additionally, the tailwheel received a longer strut for a cleaner airflow under the stabilizer on the ground – the original, shorter strut created an air cushion under the stabilizer that lifted the whole tail upwards when the throttle was opened, resulting in poor handling at low taxiing speeds.
Modifications to rectify the problems took until late December, and by this time a second prototype had been completed. After a few taxiing tests, it was transferred to the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) for full-scale wind tunnel testing that lasted until February 1945.
On the 26th of that month, the RAF issued requirements that the aircraft should have a maximum speed of 770 km/h (480 mph) at sea level and a speed of 850 km/h (530 mph) at an altitude of 5,000 meters (16,400 ft). It should be able to climb to that altitude in 4 1/2 minutes or less and it should have a range of 500 kilometers (310 mi) at 90% of maximum speed.
The Jetfire failed to meet these targets, but it was still fast enough to intercept the V-1 and was quickly available. The average speed of V-1s was 550 km/h (340 mph) and their average altitude was 1,000 m (3,300 ft) to 1,200 m (3,900 ft). Fighter aircraft required excellent low altitude performance to intercept them and enough firepower to ensure that they were destroyed in the air rather than crashing to earth and detonating. Most aircraft were too slow to catch a V-1 unless they had a height advantage, allowing them to gain speed by diving on their target.
Originally a total of 200 Jetfire Mk.Is were ordered, and on the drawing board an improved variant with a bubble canopy, a slightly larger tail fin, stabilizers with a 10° dihedral in order to get them better out of the jet efflux’s path and an armament of four 20 mm cannon (the Mk.II) was already taking shape. But this initial and any follow-on orders were quickly cancelled or changed to the more advanced and promising twin-engined Gloster Meteor that finally became operational.
Consequently, the total production run of the Jetfire Mk.I just reached 26 aircraft: 18 were delivered to RAF 616 Squadron, the rest were used by the Tactical Flight at Farnborough that had been established in 1944 in order to prepare active squadrons for the radically new jet fighters. In late March 1945, the Jetfires became operational, upon which both tactical applications and limitations were extensively explored.
Despite many shortcomings (sluggish acceleration, poor climb and agility except for a very good roll rate), the still rather experimental and primitive Jetfire was able to fulfill its intended V-1 interception role, and two V-1 interceptions were achieved during the following weeks. In the front line units they were quickly replaced by more effective types like the Gloster Meteor, the Hawker Tempest or the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. Anyway, the Jetfire was still helpful to path the RAF’s way for operational jet fighters and helped discover new high speed problems, including compressibility buffeting at higher speeds, causing increased drag, and it showed clearly the limits of traditional fighter aircraft designs.
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 31 ft 8 in (9.66 m)
Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)
Height: 10 ft 0 in (3.05 m)
Wing area: 242.1 sq ft (22.49 m2)
Airfoil: NACA 2213 (root), NACA 2209.4 (tip)
Empty weight: 8,434 lb (3,826 kg)
Gross weight: 12,211 lb (5,539 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Rolls-Royce B.37 Derwent turbojet, 2,000 lbf (8.9 kN) static thrust
Performance:
Maximum speed: 748 km/h (468 mph)
Range: 395 km (247 miles) with internal fuel only
Service ceiling: 12,750 m (41,820 ft)
Rate of climb: 12 m/s (2362 ft/min)
Thrust/weight: 0.45
Time to altitude: 5.0 min to 30,000 ft (9,145 m)
Armament:
2× 20 mm British Hispano MkV cannons (120 RPG) and
2× 12,7 mm (0.5") machine guns (250 RPG) in the outer wings
Provision for up to six "60lb" 3" rockets under the outer wings,
or two 500 lb (227 kg) bombs, or a pair of drop tanks
The kit and its assembly:
The first entry for the "Old Kit" group build at whatifmodelers.com in late 2016 - anything goes, the kit's mould just has to date back to 1985 and further. For this one I settled on the FROG Spitfire Mk. XIV, which, AFAIK, dates back to 1969, and an engine donor from a KP Yak-23, which is supposed to have hit the markets behind the Iron Curtain in 1981.
Originally, the background story pretty much sums up the idea behind this kitbash: How could the - already fast - Spitfire be further augmented with one of the new jet engines around 1944, when V1 attacks started against the British main land and the Meteor was still in development? A simple engine swap with as much airframe of the piston-engine ancestor would be the answer. Similar ideas had been undertaken in Germany, with re-engined versions of the Bf 109 and the Fw 190, and after WWII, when German jet technology had become available to the Soviet Union, the Yak-15/17/23 family followed a similar pattern.
The Yak-23 came as a natural donation aircraft for the Derwent nose. After careful measures and strategic cuts the Spitfire lost its Griffon engine (already earmarked for another kitbash...) and the Yak-23 its nose and exhaust pipe: the original plan had been to use a central, ventral exhaust pipe under the cockpit, even though this would create issues with the tail wheel (just as on the Yak-15 - it received in service an all-metal tail wheel! Imagine the sparks on the runway...).
Anyway, while dry-fitting the parts it turned out that pretty little of the Yak-23 exhaust section could be mounted with clean lines: I'd either have had to create a semi-recessed exhaust with lots of body work (and pretty implausible), or switch to a totally different solution.
That came with a bifurcated exhaust pipe, running along the wing roots and ending at the wings' trailing edge. While this sounds weird, too, the Hawker SeaHawk actually had such an arrangement - on a service aircraft!
As a side effect, the fairings for the jet pipes now offered a good basis for the necessary intersection between the round and bulky Derwent nose fairing and the narrow, oval Spitfire fuselage.
The new jet pipes were created with styrene tubes and lots of putty, and the result does not look bad at all. Actually, with the deleted radiators and the Griffon carburetor intake gone, the aircraft has a very sleek profile, even though the top view reveals the innate "pod and boom" layout of the nose-mounted centrifugal jet engine.
The latter received a new intake interior with some fine mesh and a central bullet fairing (the Yak-23's vertical splitter would not make any sense, since there'd be no nose wheel anymore). The landing gear was taken more or less OOB, I just added some struts and extra wheel covers. The tail wheel comes from an Airfix Hawker Hurricane and changed into a fully retractable arrangement. The cockpit was taken OOB, too, just a tank dummy was added behind the pilot's seat and the canopy sliced into three pieces for an optional open display.
The "E wing" armament was taken over from the Spitfire Mk. XIV, I just added the elegant drop/slipper tanks from the Yak-23 kit. This breaks up the clean lines of the "Jetfire", but I think that the thirsty Derwent might have needed some extra fuel for a decent approach range and some loiter time while intercepting incoming V-1s?
The V-1 from the FROG kit was built for the flight scenes, too. It’s a very simple model consisting only of four parts with rather mediocre fir, esp. the pulse engine halves, but a fairly good representation. Maybe the propeller for the fuse timer is missing, but that can be scratched easily.
Only personal additions are a grate in the air intake, and a hidden adapter for a display, for the pics. Maybe this flying bomb ends up later as ordnance under a German bomber build?
Painting and markings:
Very conservative, late war RAF Dark Green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey with typical ID markings and codes. 616 Squadron was chosen because it was one of the units that introduced the Meteor for V-1 interception.
Paints are basically enamels from the ModelMaster Authentic range. The Sky fuselage band was improvised with a decal from a vintage Matchbox Brewster Buffalo (matching the the Sky code letters from Xtradecal pretty well), while the codes and serial numbers themselves were created from single letter digits (the "/G" addition to the serial number signaled that the aircraft was to be guarded at any time while on the ground).
The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey while the landing gear became aluminum. As a highlight, the air intake edge was painted with silver, more for a dramatic effect than for realism.
The yellow wing leading edge markings were created with generic decal sheet material. The only special markings on the aircraft are the white stripes on tail and wings, which I also used to underlay the serial code.
Only little panel-shading and weathering was done, some panel lines were manually created with a fine pencil since a lot of surface details on the fuselage were lost during the extensive PSR process around the wing/jet pipes area.
Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
The V-1 has painted with no special paradigm in mind, with RLM81 upper surfaces and RLM 76 undersides, with a very wavy waterline and some grey patches on the wings. The engine was painted with aluminum first and then a thin coat of red primer added.
The resulting aircraft of this kitbash looks better than expected, even though the change of the exhaust arrangement came unexpected – even though I think the Jetfire became more appealing through the side pipes, despite the overall tadpole proportions.
As a side note, the story is not over yet, because there’s an engine-less Yak-23 left over, and I wonder what it might look like with a piston engine grafted to the empty nose?
Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67R turboprop engine on N932H.
N932H was originally built for the USAAF during World War II as C-47B 45-1098, c/n 34368.
Its original Pratt & Whitney R-1830 radial engines have been replaced with Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67R turboprop engines, along with other modifications and updates performed by Basler Turbo Conversions.
N932H is the most sophisticated of the three DC-3 / C-47 types operated by Airborne Support, Inc. of Houma, Louisiana. Airborne Support maintains the aircraft in readiness to apply dispersants on water affected by oil spills.
Photographed at Houma-Terrabonnne Airport (HUM)
Houma, Louisiana
Airborne Support:
Basler Turbo Conversions:
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background
The history of Focke Wulf's Fw 190 in Japan started with a rejection: in 1943 a single FW 190 A-5 had been supplied to Japan for evaluation, but at first, the type was not put into production by the Japanese. Anyway, the results of the study by Japanese engineers were incorporated in the design of the Ki-61 fighter. This evaluation did not go unnoticed, since the type received the Allied code-name 'Fred'.
By that time, the teething development problems of Mitubishi's J2M ‘Raiden’ (Thunderbolt) 'Jack' led to a slowdown in production. Biggest issues were the Kasei engine, an unreliable propeller pitch change mechanism and the main undercarriage members. Another drawback of the type was that its design put emphasis on performance and pilot protection rather than maneuverability. By the time the Fw 190 was tested, only fourteen J2M had been completed.
To make matters even worse, the Mitsubishi A7M 'Reppu' fighter was also behind schedule, so that replacements for the A6M 'Zero', backbone of the IJN’s air force, were overdue.
This situation left the Imperial Japanese Navy without a land-based interceptor. The first few produced J2M2 were delivered to the development units in December 1942 but further trials and improvements took almost a year, and it took until June 1944 that the ‘Raiden’ could make its combat debut, during the Battle of the Philippine Sea.
While the Raiden was to be developed further for the high-altitude interceptor role, the IJN decided in January 1944 to adopt the highly effective Fw 190 as a supplementary interceptor for medium heights - only as a stop-gap at first, but the type quickly evolved into various sub-variants, much like in Germany.
License production of the adopted Fw 190 started at Hitachi in May 1944. The original airframe was modified to cater to Japanese needs and customs, and the most obvious difference of the J10F1, how the plane was officially called, was the use of the Mitsubishi MK4R Kasei 23c radial engine instead of the original BMW 801. It was a modified version of the engine in the J2M, but simplified and made more reliable. The engine produced 1.820hp and drove a four-bladed propeller. Another distinctive feature was a small fin fillet, which compensated directional instability due to the longer forward fuselage.
By its pilots, the J10F quickly became called “hueruge” (フエルゲル), a transcription of the Fw 190's German nickname "Würger" (=Shrike).
Variants:
J10F1
The original main variant with the MK4R Kasei 23e and armed with 2× 13.2 mm Type 3 machine guns and 4× 20 mm two Type 99 Model 2 cannons, 354 aircraft produced.
While no official sub-variant was developed or designated, single machines differed considerably in equipment. This included field-modifications like reduced armament for better performance or ground-attack equipment, e .g. racks for a total of four unguided 60kg air-to-air missiles under the outer wings.
J10F1-G
In late 1945 a few J10F1 were modified for the anti-ship role and night attacks, and they received the "-G" suffix for their new land-based bomber role. These planes had a reduced gun armament, flame dampers and an IR sight, similar to the German “Spanner” device.
Most of these planes were to carry special weapons, like a single indigenous Ke-Go 110 heat-seeking guided bomb under the belly, or, alternatively, a copy of the German Bv 246 "Hagelkorn" gliding bomb, which had been delivered to Japan in 1944 for tests and adopted for production. To allow more space under the fuselage while carrying these bombs on the ground, some of these aircraft had a longer tail wheel strut fitted. Additionally, tests were made with a torpedo on the centerline hardpoint. It is uncertain if these weapons were actually used in combat, though.
J10F2
The only variant that was developed so far that it entered service, incorporating many detail modifications and improvements. These included thicker armored glass in the cabin's windshield (from 5.5 cm/2.2” to 7.6cm/3”) and extra armor plating behind the pilot's seat. The wing skinning was thickened in localized areas to allow for a further increase in dive speed. A water-methanol engine boost was added, which allowed an engine output of 2.050 hp for short periods, which boosted the top speed to 695 km/h. 52 were produced.
J10F3
High altitude project with a pressurized cabin, a larger wing span of 11.96 m (39 ft 2 in) and a turbo-supercharged MK4R-C Kasei 23c engine, with the turbo-supercharger mounted behind the cockpit (itself made wider). This doubled the altitude at which the engine could produce its rated power, from 15,750ft up to 30,185ft. The J10F3 only carried two 20mm cannons in the wing roots, but had two extra oblique-firing 20mm cannon installed aft of the cockpit for use against high flying American B-29 bombers (much like the German "Schräge Musik" installments). Two prototypes were completed in June 1945, but the turbo-supercharger proved troublesome, and no further aircraft of this type were produced.
From late 1944 on, the J10F1 was quickly thrown into service and became a nasty surprise for Allied aircraft. The modified Focke Wulf design proved to be agile, fast and much tougher than earlier Japanese fighters, coupled with a relatively heavy armament. Beyond interception duties, the J10F1 was frequently employed in close support and anti-shipping tasks, since its low level handling and ordnance load was excellent.
Its only drawback was - as with the original Fw 190 - that performance dropped at heights above 6.000m. This should not have posed a problem with the J2M, but that type's delay left the Allied high-altitude bomber attacks relatively unharmed, so that the J10F3 version was hastily developed, but failed to realize. In Germany, the similar situation resulted in the Fw 190 D-9 variant and finally in the superb Ta-152.
J10F1General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 9.29 m (30 ft 6¾ in)
Wingspan:10.51 m (34 ft 5 in)
Height: 3.95 m (12 ft 12 in)
Wing area:18.30 m² (196.99 ft²)
Empty weight: 3,490 kg (7,694 lb)
Max. take-off weight: 4,840 kg (10,670 lb)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 656 km/h (408 mph) at 19,420 ft (5,920 m)
Rate of climb:17 m/s (3,300 ft/min)
Range: 800 km (500 mi)
Service ceiling: 12,000 m (39,370 ft)
Engine: 1 Mitsubishi MK4R Kasei 23e radial engine with 1.820hp
Armament:
2 × 13.2 mm Type 3 machine guns, 300 rpg, in the nose
4 × 20 mm two Type 99 Model 2 cannons, 200 rpg, two in the wing roots, two outside of the landing gear.
Three hardpoints, one under the fuselage (max. 500 kg/1.102 lb) and one under each wing for 250 kg/550 lb each for bombs or fuel tanks. Total external ordnance load of 1.000kg (2.205 lb).
The kit and its assembly
The 'Japanese Fw 190' is a popular what-if topic, so I wanted to add my interpretation to the plethora of whifs and replicas of the real test machine. Actually, a clean Fw 190 looks pretty Japanese with its radial engine and sleek lines. When I recently came across a similar build at britmodelers.com, I thought that painting a Fw 190 green/grey and putting some Hinomarus on is logical and simple, but there's more in the subject than just cosmetics. I wanted a bit more... And while the concept remained simple, I had enough ideas and spare parts for a twin combo! In the end, the J10F was built as a pure interceptor and as a 'special purpose' night strike aircraft.
Basically, my limiting design idea for the J10F's design was the idea that Japan would not have received the Fw 190’s original BMW 801 radial engine, so that an alternative powerplant had to be fitted. I had hoped that this would have set the 'new' plane outwardly a bit apart from its German ancestor, and also make you look twice because the result would not be a 1:1 "Japanized" Fw 190 A/F. I tried, but I suppose that the effect is not as 'powerful' as intended – but judge for yourself?
The basic kits for both conversions come from Hobby Boss. It is a simple and clean kit, but with very good fit and engraved details. In an attempt to change the plane's look a little, I tried to transplant other engines - radials, too. Donation parts for both kits come from an Italeri Ju 188, which features two pairs of engines. The radials I used are actually BMW 801’s, too, but they lack the typical cooling fan and the cowlings are 3-4mm longer because they'd carry the engine mountings on the Ju 188's wings. Actually, the fuselage is minimal longer now, maybe 4-5mm, but the shape is still very close to the original Fw 190, so I think that this mod hardly is recognizable at all?
The change was a bit tricky, due to the massive fuselage of the Hobby Boss kit, but it worked. The new cowlings received new cooling louvres and exhaust pipes. New, four-bladed propellers were added, scratch-built from leftover Mosquito NF.30 propellers from the Airfix kit and drop tank front halves.
Otherwise, though, not much was changed, the two kits just differ in equipment details and received Matchbox pilot figures in order to cover up the bleak and very deep cockpit.
The interceptor:
As an interceptor I left the plane clean, without external ordnance. I wanted to emphasize its elegant look, which makes it look like a Ki-43 on casual glance, or even an A6M. The plane carries the normal gun armament (from a Fw 190 A-8), this is supposed to be the original/standard J10F mentioned above.
The night attacker:
The J10F1-G variant saw more modifications, including a new exhaust system with flame dampers built from scratch. Other special equipment comprises an IR sight in front of the canopy, flare protectors, the fuselage hardpoint and the scratch-built Ke-Go 110 bomb. In order to cover the deleted gun access panels under the wings, I added streamlined bomb shackles for two Japanese 60kg bombs each, donated from a Matchbox Ju 87 kit.
About the Ke-Go bomb
This bomb, which looks like a penguin, is a fantasy derivate of a real Japanese development series until summer 1945. In a nutshell, the Ke-Go bomb actually was one of the first “fire and forget” weapons I have heard of. With the guidance of a bolometer seeker and a self-correcting steering mechanism, the bomb would (only) be useable against strong and clear heat sources – a ship’s kettle at night, when surrounding heat level was low, would qualify, and the bomb would be guided by deviation and correction from that heat source - if it locked on correctly, though! My Ke-Go 110 is a smaller version of the original Ke-Go bombs, suitable for lighter planes.
Painting
Being an IJN plane, paint scheme choices for the J10F were rather limited - and since it is a whif plane I stuck to my policy that I rather use a simple/subtle paint scheme.
The interceptor:
For the clean and rather conservative interceptor I settled for a simple IJN Green/Gray livery (N. 2 ‘Aomidori-iro’, a bluish, very dark green and N.10 ‘Hairyokushoku’, respectively), with Testors 2116 and 2117 as basic tones. Yellow wing leading edges were added, cut from an aftermarket decal sheet. As a design twist I painted the engine cowling black, A6M-style. The propeller spinner was painted in red brown (typical Japanese WWII primer color), with an orange tip, matching the arrow symbol decal on the tail fin. The propeller blades were painted with Testor’s ‘Rubber’, #1183.
A slightly worn look was achieved through a light wash with black ink and some dry painting with paler shades of Green (Humbrol 91 and 185) and Aluminum, plus light exhaust marks and gun smoke residues with flat black. Some bare metal spots were added, which also highlight some details and add to the worn look.
All decals for the green fighter come from a Hobby Boss A6M, only the arrows come from the Hobby Boss He 162. Finally, everything was sealed under a semi-matte varnish, for a light shine to the surface – typical IJN machines appear to be rather shiny?
The night attacker:
This variant received a more fantastic and stealthy paint scheme - I wanted to set the plane apart from the clean and shiny interceptor: a grunty, desperate strike aircraft against overwhelming sea forces.
AFAIK, there had not been specific nocturnal cammo schemes at the IJNAS, except for all-green aircraft? A bit boring, I thought, esp. with a typical green/gray sister plane.
So I made up a personal variant: In a first step, upper surfaces were painted in a brownish-grey basic tone, AFAIK called ‘Ameiro’ – it is the color which was used on early Zeroes which were based on carriers, and the tone faded quickly to a light gray. This color is very similar to RAL 7014 ‘Fenstergrau’ and reminds of B.S. ‘Hemp’. I improvised it with a mix of Humbrol 141 (60%), 83 (35%) and a bit of 155 (5%). On top of that a dense array of dark green blotches (Humbrol 185, Chrome Green, at first, and later also with Humbrol 116 for more contrast) was applied, breaking up the plane’s lines and covering the light gray tone almost completely.
Undersides originally sported ‘Ameiro’, too, but they were painted as if they had been covered with a very dark gray tone in the field (Humbrol 67), even leaving out the hinomarus and flaking off everywhere. The black engine cowling was retained.
Hinomaru and squadron emblems come from the same Mitsubishi A6M from Hobby Boss as mentioned above, featuring even less markings. As a side note: I have never seen Hinomaru with a black(!) rim before? I am not certain if this is correct or an authentic modification - it matches the night fighter role perfectly, though. This time I chose a matte varnish, except for the cowling which received some streaks with more shiny semi-matte varnish.
In both cases, cockpit interior surfaces and landing gear wells were painted in ‘Aodake Iro’, simulated with a base of Aluminium (Humbrol 56) and a coat of translucent blue lacquer on top.
All in all, these pair of rather simple model kit was built in a couple of days, taking the pictures and waiting for good light took almost the same time! I am not 100% happy, because the engine mod is not as obvious as I expected, even though the four-bladed prop and the slightly elongated fuselage give the J10F a menacing and fast look, like a “Baby Tempest”.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In the first years of the war, the Wehrmacht had only little interest in developing self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, but as the Allies developed air superiority and dedicated attack aircraft threatened the ground troops from above, the need for more mobile and better-armed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns increased. As a stopgap solution the Wehrmacht initially adapted a variety of wheeled, half-track and tracked vehicles to serve as mobile forward air defense positions. Their tasks were to protect armor and infantry units in the field, as well as to protect temporary forward area positions such as mobile headquarters and logistic points.
These vehicles were only lightly armored, if at all, and rather mobilized the anti-aircraft weapons. As Allied fighter bombers and other ground attack aircraft moved from machine gun armament and bombing to air-to-ground rockets and large-caliber cannons, the air defense positions were even more vulnerable. The answer was to adapt a tank chassis with a specialized turret that would protect the gun crews while they fired upon approaching Allied aircraft. Furthermore, the vehicle would have the same mobility as the battle tanks it protected.
Initial German AA-tank designs were the ‘Möbelwagen’ and the ‘Wirbelwind’, both conversions of refurbished Panzer IV combat tank chassis with open platforms or turrets with four 20mm cannon. Alternatively, a single 37mm AA gun was mounted, too – but all these vehicles were just a compromise and suffered from light armor, a high silhouette and lack of crew protection.
Further developments of more sophisticated anti-aircraft tank designs started in late 1943 and led into different directions. One development line was the ‘Kugelblitz’, another Panzer IV variant, but this time the ball-shaped turret, armed with very effective 30 mm MK 103 cannon, was fully integrated into the hull, resulting in a low silhouette and a protected crew. However, the ‘Kugelblitz’ only featured two of these guns and the tilting turret was very cramped and complicated. Venting and ammunition feed problems led to serious delays and a prolonged development stage.
The ‘Coelian’ family of bigger turrets with various weapon options for the Panzer V (the ‘Panther’) was another direction, especially as a response against the armored Il-2 attack aircraft at the Eastern front and against flying targets at medium altitude. Targets at high altitude, esp. Allied bombers, were to be countered with the very effective 8.8 cm Flak, and there were also several attempts to mount this weapon onto a fully armored hull.
The primary weapon for a new low/medium altitude anti-aircraft tank was to become the heavy automatic 55 mm MK 214. Like the 30 mm MK 103 it was a former aircraft weapon, belt-fed and adapted to continuous ground use. However, in early 1944, teething troubles with the ‘Kugelblitz’ suggested that a completely enclosed turret with one or (even better) two of these new weapons, mounted on a ‘Panther’ or the new E-50/75 tank chassis, would need considerable development time. Operational vehicles were not expected to enter service before mid-1945. In order to fill this operational gap, a more effective solution than the Panzer IV AA conversions, with more range and firepower than anything else currently in service, was direly needed.
This situation led to yet another hasty stopgap solution, the so-called ‘Ostwind II’ weapon system, which consisted primarily of a new turret, mated with a standard medium battle tank chassis. It was developed in a hurry in the course of 1944 and already introduced towards the end of the same year. The ‘Ostwind II’ was a compromise in the worst sense: even though it used two 37 mm FlaK 43 guns in a new twin mount and offered better firepower than any former German AA tank, it also retained many weaknesses from its predecessors: an open turret with only light armor and a high silhouette. But due to the lack of time and resources, the ‘Ostwind II’ was the best thing that could be realized on short notice, and with the perspective of more effective solutions within one year’s time it was rushed into production.
The ‘Ostwind II’ system was an open, roughly diamond-shaped, octagonal turret, very similar in design to the Panzer IV-based ‘Wirbelwind’ and ‘Ostwind’ (which was re-designated ‘Ostwind I’). As a novelty, in order to relieve the crew from work overload, traverse and elevation of the turret was hydraulic, allowing a full elevation (-4° to +90° was possible) in just over four seconds and a full 360° traverse in 15 seconds. This had become necessary because the new turret was bigger and heaver, both the weapons and their crews required more space, so that the Ostwind II complex could not be mounted onto the Panzer IV chassis anymore and movement by hand was just a fallback option.
In order to provide the ‘Ostwind II’ with a sufficiently large chassis, it was based on the SdKfz. 171 Panzer V medium battle tank, the ‘Panther’, exploiting its bigger turret ring, armor level and performance. The Panther chassis had, by late 1944, become available for conversions in considerable numbers through damaged and/or recovered combat tanks, and updated details like new turrets or simplified road wheels were gradually introduced into production and during refurbishments. Mounting the ‘Ostwind II’ turret on the Panzer VI (Tiger) battle tank chassis had been theoretically possible, too, but it never happened, because the Tiger lacked agility and its protection level and fuel consumption were considered impractical for an SPAAG that would typically protect battle tank groups.
The ‘Ostwind II’ turret was built around a motorized mount for the automatic 3.7 cm FlaK 43 twin guns. These proven weapons were very effective against aircraft flying at altitudes up to 4,200 m, but they also had devastating effect against ground targets. The FlaK 43’s armor penetration was considerable when using dedicated ammunition: at 100 m distance it could penetrate 36 mm of a 60°-sloped armor, and at 800 m distance correspondingly 24 mm. The FlaK 43’s theoretical maximum rate of fire was 250 shots/minute, but it was practically kept at ~120 rpm in order to save ammunition and prevent wear of the barrels. The resulting weight of fire was 76.8 kg (169 lb) per minute, but this was only theoretical, too, because the FlaK 43 could only be fed manually by 6-round clips – effectively, only single shots or short bursts could be fired, but a trained crew could maintain fire through using alternating gun use. A more practical belt feed was at the time of the Ostwind II's creation not available yet, even though such a mechanism was already under development for the fully enclosed Coelian turret, which could also take the FlaK 43 twin guns, but the armament was separated from the turret crew.
The new vehicle received the official designation ‘Sd.Kfz. 171/2 Flakpanzer V’, even though ‘Ostwind II’ was more common. When production actually began and how many were built is unclear. The conversion of Panther hulls could have started in late-1944 or early-1945, with sources disagreeing. The exact number of produced vehicles is difficult to determine, either. Beside the prototype, the number of produced vehicles goes from as little as 6 to over 40. The first completed Ostwind II SPAAGs were exclusively delivered to Eastern front units and reached them in spring 1945, where they were immediately thrown into action.
All Flakpanzer vehicles at that time were allocated to special anti-aircraft tank platoons (so-called Panzer Flak Züge). These were used primarily to equip Panzer Divisions, and in some cases given to special units. By the end of March 1945, there were plans to create mixed platoons equipped with the Ostwinds and other Flakpanzers. Depending on the source, they were either to be used in combination with six Kugelblitz, six Ostwinds and four Wirbelwinds or with eight Ostwinds and three Sd.Kfz. 7/1 half-tracks. Due to the war late stage and the low number of anti-aircraft tanks of all types built, this reorganization was never truly implemented, so that most vehicles were simply directly attached to combat units, primarily to the commanding staff.
The Ostwind II armament proved to be very effective, but the open turret (nicknamed ‘Keksdose’ = cookie tin) left the crews vulnerable. The crew conditions esp. during wintertime were abominable, and since aiming had to rely on vision the system's efficacy was limited, esp. against low-flying targets. The situation was slightly improved when the new mobile ‘Medusa’ and ‘Basilisk’ surveillance and target acquisition systems were introduced. These combined radar and powerful visual systems and guided the FlaK crews towards incoming potential targets, what markedly improved the FlaKs' first shot hit probability. However, the radar systems rarely functioned properly, the coordination of multiple SPAAGs in the heat of a low-level air attack was a challenging task, and - to make matters worse - the new mobile radar systems were even more rare than the new SPAAGs themselves.
All Ostwind II tanks were built from recovered ‘Panther’ battle tanks of various versions. The new Panther-based SPAAGs gradually replaced most of the outdated Panzer IV AA variants as well as the Ostwind I. Their production immediately stopped in the course of 1945 when the more sophisticated 'Coelian' family of anti-aircraft tanks with fully enclosed turrets became available. This system was based on Panzer V hulls, too, and it was soon followed by the first E-50 SPAAGs with the new, powerful twin-55 mm gun.
Specifications:
Crew: Six (commander, gunner, 2× loader, driver, radio-operator/hull machine gunner)
Weight: 43.8 tonnes (43.1 long tons; 48.3 short tons)
Length (hull only): 6.87 m (22 ft 6 in)
Width: 3.42 m (11 ft 3 in)
Height: 3.53 m (11 ft 6 3/4 in)
Suspension: Double torsion bar, interleaved road wheels
Fuel capacity: 720 litres (160 imp gal; 190 US gal)
Armor:
15–80 mm (0.6 – 3.15 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 46 km/h (29 mph)
Operational range: 250 km (160 mi)
Power/weight: 15.39 PS (11.5 kW)/tonne (13.77 hp/ton)
Engine:
Maybach HL230 P30 V-12 petrol engine with 700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW)
ZF AK 7-200 gear; 7 forward 1 reverse
Armament:
2× 37 mm (1.46 in) FlaK 43 cannon in twin mount with 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun in the front glacis plate with 2.500 rounds
The kit and its assembly:
This was a spontaneous build, more or less the recycling of leftover parts from a 1:72 Revell Ostwind tank on a Panzer III chassis that I had actually bought primarily for the chassis (it became a fictional Aufklärungspanzer III). When I looked at the leftover turret, I wondered about a beefed-up/bigger version with two 37 mm guns. Such an 'Ostwind II' was actually on the German drawing boards, but never realized - but what-if modelling can certainly change that. However, such a heavy weapon would have to be mounted on a bigger/heavier chassis, so the natural choice became the Panzer V, the Panther medium battle tank. This way, my ‘Ostwind II’ interpretation was born.
The hull for this fictional AA tank is a Hasegawa ‘Panther Ausf. G’ kit, which stems from 1973 and clearly shows its age, at least from today’s point of view. While everything fits well, the details are rather simple, if not crude (e. g. the gratings on the engine deck or the cupola on the turret). However, only the lower hull and the original wheels were used since I wanted to portray a revamped former standard battle tank.
The turret was a more complicated affair. It had to be completely re-constructed, to accept the enlarged twin gun and to fit onto the Panther hull. The first step was the assembly of the twin gun mount, using parts from the original Ostwind kit and additional parts from a second one. In order to save space and not to make thing uber-complicated I added the second weapon to the right side of the original gun and changed some accessories.
This, together with the distance between the barrels, gave the benchmark for the turret's reconstruction. Since the weapon had not become longer, I decided to keep things as simple as possible and just widen the open turret - I simply took the OOB Ostwind hexagonal turret (which consists of an upper and lower half), cut it up vertically and glued them onto the Panther turret's OOB base, shifting the sides just as far to the outside that the twin gun barrels would fit between them - a distance of ~0.4 inch (1 cm). At the rear the gap was simply closed with styrene sheet, while the front used shield parts from the Revell Ostwind kit that come from a ground mount for the FlaK 43. Two parts from this shield were glued together and inserted into the front gap. While this is certainly not as elegant as e. g. the Wirbelwind turret, I think that this solution was easier to integrate.
Massive PSR was necessary to blend the turret walls with the Panther turret base, and as a late modification the opening for the sight had to be moved, too. To the left of the weapons, I also added a raised protective shield for the commander.
Inside of the turret, details from the Ostwind kit(s), e. g. crew seats and ammunition clips, were recycled, too.
Painting and markings:
Since the Ostwind II would be based on a repaired/modified former Panzer V medium battle tank, I settled upon a relatively simple livery. The kit received a uniform finish in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), with a network of greenish-grey thin stripes added on top, to break up the tank's outlines and reminiscent of the British ‘Malta’ scheme, but less elaborate. The model and its parts were initially primed with matt sand brown from the rattle can (more reddish than RAL 7028) and then received an overall treatment with thinned RAL 7028 from Modelmaster, for an uneven, dirty and worn look. The stripes were created with thinned Tamiya XF-65 (Field Grey).
Once dry, the whole surface received a dark brown wash, details were emphasized with dry-brushing in light grey and beige. Decals were puzzled together from various German tank sheets, and the kit finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
The black vinyl tracks were also painted/weathered, with a wet-in-wet mix of black, grey, iron and red brown (all acrylics). Once mounted into place, mud and dust were simulated around the running gear and the lower hull with a greyish-brown mix of artist mineral pigments.
A bit of recycling and less exotic than one would expect, but it’s still a whiffy tank model that fits well into the historic gap between the realized Panzer IV AA tanks and the unrealized E-50/75 projects. Quite subtle! Creating the enlarged turret was the biggest challenge, even, even more so because it was/is an open structure and the interior can be readily seen. But the new/bigger gun fits well into it, and it even remained movable!
Unusual conversion of the SP250 Dart, featuring a sliding hardtop which drops into recesses either side of the boot - spotted at the NEC Classic Show November 2012.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
After the Ukrainian independence in 1991, the Ukrainian Air Force (Повітряні Сили України, Povitryani Syly Ukrayiny) was established on March 17, 1992, in accordance with a Directive of the General Staff Chief of the Armed Forces. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, many aircraft were left on Ukrainian territory, including a wide range of fighters and attack aircraft, helicopters and even strategic bombers, and these became the initial equipment. Ever since, the Ukrainian air force has been downsizing and upgrading its forces, but for many years the main inventory still consisted of Soviet-made aircraft.
Following the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution and subsequent March 2014 Russian annexation of the Crimea peninsula and the following violence and insurgency in east Ukraine, the Ukrainian government tried to increase its defense spending and capabilities. Returning equipment (of Russian origin, though) to service was a key part of the spending drive, but in parallel attempts were made to procure flying material from Western sources in order to become moer and more independent from the obtrusive neighbor. In April 2014 two MiG-29 aircraft were restored to flight on short notice and in August a decommissioned An-26 transport aircraft was restored to active service by a volunteer group. On 5 January 2015 the air force received another 4 restored airplanes, two MiG-29s and two Su-27s, as well as two Mi-8 and Mi-2 helicopters. However, since these aircraft had already accumulated a considerable number of flying hours, this could only have been an interim solution and the Ukraine turned directly to NATO for material support.
This politically highly delicate help was eventually granted in the form of eight General Dynamics F-16 C (six) and D (two) multi-role fighters of early Block 40 standard, leased from the U.S.A. and diverted from active aircraft which were about to become surplus stock and mothballed, anyway.
The F-16 Fighting Falcon itself was a single-engine supersonic multirole fighter aircraft originally developed by General Dynamics for the United States Air Force (USAF). Designed as a light air superiority day fighter as a complement to the heavier F-15 Eagle interceptor, it evolved into a successful all-weather multirole aircraft. Over 4,600 aircraft were built since production was approved in 1976. In 1993, General Dynamics sold its aircraft manufacturing business to the Lockheed Corporation, which in turn became part of Lockheed Martin after a 1995 merger with Martin Marietta.
Although no longer being purchased by the launch customer, the U.S. Air Force, improved versions are still being built for export customers – the F-16 has been procured to serve in the air forces of 25 other nations all around the world, making it one of the world's most numerous fixed-wing aircraft in military service.
The Fighting Falcon's key features include a frameless bubble canopy for better visibility, side-mounted control stick to ease control while maneuvering, an ejection seat reclined 30 degrees from vertical to reduce the effect of g-forces on the pilot, and the first use of a relaxed static stability/fly-by-wire flight control system which helps to make it an agile aircraft. The F-16 has an internal M61 Vulcan cannon and the advanced C/D version features a total of 11 locations for mounting weapons and other mission equipment.
The eight machines for the Ukraine arrived in June 2016 via direct transfer flights over the Atlantic and Western Europe. The former USAF machines were delivered “as is”, even though they had some state-of-the-art avionics replaced by less sensitive alternatives from older F-16 production blocks. Together with the fighters, an undisclosed number of AIM-9M Sidewinder and AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles were delivered, but the leasing agreement did not include LANTIRN pods that would provide the F-16C/D with improved all-day/all-weather strike capability. Other equipment like ECM pods was also not included. Service, maintenance and logistics for the new type in Ukrainian service was, due to the small operational number, secured with the help of the Polish air force, which had been operating 48 F-16C/D+ Block 52 fighters since 2006 and had the required experience and facilities at its 31st Tactical Air Base in Poznań-Krzesiny.
Upon arrival, the aircraft were immediately re-painted in a striking digital camouflage and received non-consecutive tactical codes, apparently based on the airframe’s former U.S. serial numbers, using the last two digits. They were all allocated to the 40th Tactical Aviation Brigade, based at Vasylkiv air base, south of Kiev, where they replaced a number of outdated and partly grounded MiG-29 fighters. They were exclusively tasked with aerial defense of the Ukrainian capital city – also as a political sign that the machines were not intended for attack missions.
Since their introduction, the Ukrainian F-16s have been fulfilling QRA duties and airspace patrol, and the corresponding maintenance infrastructure has been gradually built up, so that F-16 operations became independent from Poland in 2019. With the worsening relationship to Russia, more military hardware of Western origin is expected to enter Ukrainian service. If the tight Ukrainian defense budget allows it, twenty more 2nd hand F-16s are to be delivered in 2021 to replace more Soviet fighter types (primarily the rest of the Ukrainian MiG-29 “Fulcrum” single and two seater fleet), and the procurement of LANTIRN pods to expand the type’s capabilities is under consideration and negotiations, too.
General characteristics:
Length: 49 ft 5 in (15.06 m)
Wingspan: 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)
Height: 16 ft (4.9 m)
Wing area: 300 sq ft (28 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 64A204
Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,573 kg)
Gross weight: 26,500 lb (12,020 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,187 kg)
Internal fuel capacity: 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg)
Powerplant:
1× General Electric F110-GE-100 afterburning turbofan
with 17,155 lbf (76.31 kN) dry and 28,600 lbf (127 kN) thrust with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: Mach 2.05 at altitude in clean configuration
Mach 1.2, 800 kn (921 mph; 1,482 km/h) at sea level
Combat range: 295 nmi (339 mi, 546 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with 4x 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs
Ferry range: 2,277 nmi (2,620 mi, 4,217 km) with drop tanks
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,000 m) plus
g limits: +9.0 (limited by flight control system)
Rate of climb: +50,000 ft/min (250 m/s)
Wing loading: 88.3 lb/sq ft (431 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)
Armament:
1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A1 Vulcan 6-barrel rotary cannon with 511 rounds
2× wing-tip air-to-air missile launch rails plus 6× under-wing
and 3× under-fuselage pylon (2 of these for sensors) stations
with a capacity of up to 17,000 lb (7,700 kg) of a wide range of stores
The kit and its assembly:
I am not a big F-16 fan, but in some cases it’s an unavoidable canvas – just like in this case here. This fictional aircraft model (or better: this model of a [yet] fictional F-16 operator) was spawned by two ideas. One was the simple question: what if the Ukraine had after the USSR’s dissolution chosen a stronger attachment to (old) Western forces after the dissolution of the USSSR? And/or: what if the Ukraine had started to procure non-Russian equipment, esp. aircraft? So, what would an Ukrainian F-16 might have looked like, in general but esp. after the Crimea annexation in 2014 when such a scenario had become even more possible?
The other source of inspiration was a picture of an Ukrainian Su-24 with grey digital camouflage, a scheme that was/is also worn by some Su-25s. When I stumbled upon an Authentic Decals sheet for this unique paint scheme that allows to apply the complex and delicate pattern through water-slide transfers, I thought that the relatively “flat” F-16 surface would be an ideal basis to try this stunt?
What sounded like a very simple livery whif on an OOB model turned into a construction nightmare. Originally, this project provided me with a purpose for a dubious Trumpeter F-16 kit that I had bought some years ago – dead cheap, but righteously so. This kit is cruel, the model even has no concrete variant specification and is apparently the re-boxing of a kit from an obscure Chinese company called “Income”. Effectively, the Trumpeter F-16 is a rip-off of Italeri’s quite nice F-16C/D kit – but the Income/Trumpeter clone comes with MUCH deeper engravings esp. on the fuselage that remind a lot of the dreaded Matchbox “trenches”. Everything is rather “soft” and toylike, the clear parts are poor and the (few) decals look like toy stickers (!!!). I’d call it crude, even the instructions are apparently poor scans or photocopies from the Italeri kit, including hints for detail painting with no corresponding reference what colors should be used at all… All that could have been overlooked, but after starting with the kit I could not commit myself to use it any further. It’s rare that I give up because of a kit’s basis!
Next idea to “save” the project’s idea of an Ukrainian F-16 was to dig out a surplus Intech F-16 from the pile, also bought long ago because it was cheap, as conversion fodder. This kit has also been re-released in infinite variations under the Mister-/Mastercraft label. Upon closer inspection this kit turned out to have massive flaws, too, but in different areas from the Trumpeter thing. For instance, the Intech kit’s wings are utterly thick, certainly 1mm thicker than the Trumpeter model’s parts. This does not sound much, but on the really thin F-16 wings and stabilizers this looks really awful! Furthermore, the clear parts had not been fully molded, so I’d have needed a replacement canopy, anyway. Again, I gave up on building…
…until I decided to make the best of this mess and combine the “best” parts from both gimp models, trying to mend the worst flaws to an acceptable level. This led to the glorious kitbashing that this model eventually became! From the Intech kit I took the acceptable fuselage, including cockpit interior, air intake and landing gear, as well as the fin and the weapon pylons. The Trumpeter kit donated its thinner wings and the stabilizers, as well as the much better open exhaust nozzle (there’s an optional closed one, too; the Intech kit only offers an open nozzle, without ANY surface detail at all, it’s just a blank pipe!).
Beyond these basic ingredients, some more donors became necessary: All clear parts from both Intech and Trumpeter kit turned out to be rubbish for various reasons. The decision to build an F-16D two-seater was dictated by the fact that I had a leftover canopy from an Italeri F-16 kit in the donor bank – luckily it fitted well to the Intech kit’s body. Two crewmen from the spares box populate the cockpit and hide the rather basic interior, which was not improved at all. Furthermore, the ordnance came from external sources, too. The characteristic drop tanks with their cut-off tails were also leftover parts from the Italeri F-16, all AAMs come from a Hasegawa weapon set.
Some PSR was necessary to blend the parts from different kits together – thankfully, almost all F-16 kits are constructed in a similar fashion, even though there are small detail differences. In this case, the wings had to be slightly modified to fit onto the Intech fuselage. However, even those parts from the original kit(s) that are supposed to fit, e.g. the fin or the alternative cockpit opening frames for the optional single- and two-seater canopies, do hardly match at all. Horrible.
I rather focused on the model’s exterior, and a personal addition to improve the overall look of the otherwise rather basic/poor model, I added some small blade antennae that were totally missing on either model. Another extra detail are the small static dischargers on the trailing edges, created with thin, heated sprue material. Only small details, but they improve IMHO the model’s look considerably.
Painting and markings:
Until today, I never dared to apply decal camouflage to a model, but I expected that the flat/smooth F-16 surface would make this stunt relatively easy. This application method would also make painting the model easy, since only a single, uniform color had to be laid down from above and below.
To my surprise, the painting instructions of the Authentic Decals sheet for a number of Ukrainian Su-25 (which all carry the same standardized pixel camouflage) indicated RAL tones – a little surprising, but: why not? Since no other authentic color references were available, I cross-checked the paint suggestions with real life pictures of Su-24s and -25s in this striking paint scheme, and the indicated tones appear very plausible.
The problem: not every RAL tone is available as a model paint, so I had to make guesstimates. This eventually led to Modelmaster 2133 (Fulcrum Grey) as a light grey overall basis (suggested: RAL 7030 Achatgrau/Agate Grey, a tone with a brownish hue) from above and Humbrol 47 (Sea Blue Gloss) for a pale blue underside. The recommendation for the belly is RAL 7001 (Silbergrau/Silver Grey, very close to FS 36375), and this appears plausible, too, even though real-life pictures suggest a more bluish tone. But for a more dramatic look and some color contrast to the upper side’s all-grey I deliberately settled upon the Humbrol color, and this looks IMHO good.
The other suggested grey tones that make up the pixel patterns are RAL 7040 (Fenstergrau/Window Grey), RAL 7037 (Staubgrau/Dust Grey) and RAL 7043 (Verkehrsgrau B/Traffic Grey).
The cockpit interior was painted in medium grey (FS 36231, Humbrol 140), the air intake and the landing gear in white (Humbrol 22). The exhaust nozzle was painted externally with individual Metallizer mixes (with blue and gold added), while the inside was painted with Burnt Steel Metallizer towards the afterburner section while the ceramic nozzle petals were painted in a pale, almost white grey with darker lines, applied wet-in-wet. This looks pretty good – but does not withstand a closer inspection, just like the rest of this Franken-bashed F-16 thing.
Applying the digital camouflage pattern went better than expected. The decals turned out to be very thin and delicate, though, with almost no excessive clear film outside of the printed areas, so that application had to be executed swiftly and with lots of water to slide them into place. Nothing for modelers who are faint at heart! Because the single pixel clouds partly follow the Su-25 outlines, the decals had partly to be tailored to the rather different F-16 shape, and due to the different proportions I also had to improvise with the material at hand – fortunately the Su-25 sheet offered enough material to cover the F-16! Some small areas lacked decal material and had to be filled through painting, though, with replacement model paints for the aforementioned darker RAL greys, namely Humbrol 246 (RLM 75) and a 2:1 mix of Humbrol 125 and 67. The lightest grey on the prints turned out to be very close to the Fulcrum Grey, so there’s unfortunately very little contrast, and this only became clear after the decals had already dried. However, I left it that way, because lightening the Fulcrum Grey up further would have been a quite messy affair, ending in a rather dirty look that I wanted to avoid, and it had called for an almost white tone.
Another challenge became the weathering process, since I normally apply a black ink wash and some post-panel shading to the finished and painted model before I add the decals to a model. Fearing that the ink might creep under the decals’ clear sections, I left that step out completely. The delicate static dischargers were another complicating factor. So, I decided to finish the upper camouflage with the light grey base and the decals cammo first. This made trimming down excess decal material easier. After that had been roughly finished, the dischargers were added and the underside was painted blue. On top of that came the “normal” decals with national markings, codes and stencils. The latter were mostly taken from a vintage Microscale F-16 sheet, the tactical code came from a Begemot Ka-27 sheet. Since the bort number on the air intake was not well visible frame every angle, I added a white 77 to the fin, too. Thereafter I added some panel lines with the help of thinned black ink and a soft pencil. This way the model appears pretty clean, and I think that’s fine since many recent Ukrainian aircraft I know from pictures look well-tended. Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish overall.
A simple F-16 in alternative markings – that’s what this model was supposed to be. I did not expect that the building phase would become such a challenge, and I’d sincerely recommend to any modeler who wants to build a “serious” F-16 in 1:72 to stay away from the Trumpeter and the Intech/Mister-/Mastercraft kits. They might be cheap, but that does not outweigh their flaws and building troubles.
Beyond these technical issues, I like the look of this “Ukrainized” Viper, the digital camouflage looks very special and works well on the aircraft. The light grey base could have been lighter, though. In fact, the F-16 now looks like an exaggerated U.S. Aggressor on first sight, but with the Ukrainian markings the whole thing looks pretty different and conclusive - a “what if” in the best sense. 😉
On 24 April, Dominicans mark the feast of the conversion of St Augustine, whose Rule they profess.
This stained glass window of the holy bishop of Hippo, and doctor of the Church, is from Preston on Stour church.
To my shock, I've been able to transfer all of my 650b components over to the Katakura Silk with NO MODIFICATIONS WHATSOEVER. Comparing measurements to my "made for 650b" bike frame, everything is exactly - and I mean EXACTLY - the same spacing. For the moment, I am as far along as I can be: fenders and rack can't be permanently installed until my brake calipers arrive sometime next week. I've run out of red housing; that, too, will arrive next week. Meanwhile, the wheels spin with more than adequate clearance for the 650b x 38 tires - ironic, because 25's were about the best I could do with 700c. Front and rear derailleurs are fine tuned and shifting perfectly on the stand. If I decide to keep the Brooks Pro rather than use a black Brooks Cambium C17 that I have, I'll need to add a pair of the VO bag loops for a saddle bag. Had I decided upon center-pulls rather than the dual pivots I chose, I would have installed a French mini-front rack for a small, lightweight, traditional front bag. Still not sure why I didn't go that route to be honest.
"La conversión espiritual de San Ignacio de Loyola", atribuído a Miguel Cabrera. Óleo sobre tela, siglo XVIII. Colección del Museo Nacional de Arte de México.
The white livery and work-stained appearance of ATI 767 N791AX shows up the window configuration from its passenger days. This aircraft started its working career with All Nippon Airways in Japan back in 1985. It is seen taxiing at Houston for a cargo flight to Wilmington Air Park Airport, Ohio.
Aircraft: Air Transport International (8C/ATN) Boeing 767-200BDSF N791AX.
Location: Houston George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH/KIAH), Texas, United States of America.
c/n 41H-912011, l/n P10 (F/A2 conversion)
Built 1979 and served with 700A Naval Air Squadron, later renamed as 899 Naval Air Squadron. She is a genuine falklands veteran and shot down two A-4 Skyhawks and two Daggers (Mirage V) during the conflict.
She was later converted to an F/A2 and continued to fly with 899NAS until she was written off on 20th October 1995 when the engine exploded during take-off at Yeovilton. The pilot made an immediate forced landing and ejected safely, while the aircraft hit the runway barrier and was badly damaged. The remains went to Boscombe Down for trials and then joined BDAC in 2003. She has been the subject of a spectacular rebuild, turning her from a burnt and battered wreck to the complete airframe seen on display here.
Boscombe Down Aviation Collection (BDAC)
Old Sarum, Wiltshire, UK.
21st August 2020
The following history for XZ457 is from the BDAC website:-
“XZ 457’s first Flight was in December 1979 with Test Pilot John Farley at the controls. The aircraft was delivered to 700A NAS Fleet Air Arm Yeovilton in January 1980, wearing code 104. It was then recoded 14 when 700A NAS became 899 NAS.
From April to June 1982 during the Falklands War she was embarked on HMS Hermes. On 21st May following an attack on HMS Ardent, Lieutenant Clive (Spag) Morrell shot down one A-4Q Skyhawk A-307 with a Sidewinder and damaged another with 30mm cannon fire. The second aircraft was subsequently confirmed as a “victory” after the conflict when it was confirmed that the pilot had ejected with undercarriage failure whilst trying to land at Port Stanley airfield. On May 24th, Lieutenant-Commander Andy Auld shot down two Grupo 6 Daggers with Sidewinders over Pebble Island.
Following its successful Falklands campaign, it was returned to 899 NAS Yeovilton and then transferred to British Aerospace and converted to an FA.2. She was then redelivered to the Royal Navy 899 NAS Yeovilton code 714. On the 20th October 1994 she suffered, an uncontained engine failure during take off and in the subsequent fire suffered extensive damage to the front fuselage particularly on the starboard side. The pilot Lieutenant-Commander Bayliss ejected successfully.
As part of the aging airframe programme the airframe which had a high time/fatigue usage was transferred to DERA (Boscombe Down) in 2001 so that fatigue and structural analysis could be carried out. However, before extensive work was carried out the decision was taken to withdraw the Sea Harrier Fleet from service and so this part of the programme was cancelled. The airframe was then considered surplus to requirements and it was donated to BDAC in four major sections (fuselage, wing, elevator, and fin) with all Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), main undercarriage, and many panels missing.”
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The origins of the Saab 19 date back before the onset of WWII. At that time, the Swedish Air Force (Flygvapnet) was equipped with largely obsolete Gloster Gladiator (J 8) biplane fighters. To augment this, Sweden ordered 120 Seversky P-35 (J 9) and 144 P-66 Vanguard (J 10) aircraft from the United States.
However, on 18 June 1940, United States declared an embargo against exporting weapons to any nation other than Great Britain. As the result, the Flygvapnet suddenly faced a shortage of modern fighters.
Just in time, Saab had presented to the Ministry on Sep 4th 1939 a fighter that had been meant to replace the obsolete Gloster Gladiators. The aircraft carried the internal development code ‘L-12’ and had been designed in collaboration with US engineers in Sweden, who were to aid with license production of Northrop 8-A 1s and NA-16-4 Ms.
The L-12 looked very much like the contemporary, Japanese Mitsubishi A6M “Zero” (which had been seriously considered by the Flygvapnet, but import or license production turned out to be impractical). The aircraft was a very modern all-metal construction with fabric covered control surfaces. The L-12 was to be powered by a 1.065 hp Bristol Taurus and maximum speed was calculated to be 605 km/h. Its relatively heavy armament consisted of four wing-mounted 13.2mm guns and two synchronized 8 mm MGs on top of the engine, firing through the propeller arc.
The design was quickly approved and the new aircraft was to be introduced to the Flygvapnet as the ‘J 19A’. Production aircraft would be outfitted with a more powerful Bristol Taurus II, giving 1.400 hp with 100-octane fuel and pushing the top speed to 630 km/h. But the war’s outbreak spoiled these plans literally over night: the L-12 had to be stopped, as the intended engine and any import or license production option vanished. This was a severe problem, since production of the first airframes had already started at Trollhättan, in the same underground factory where the B 3 bomber (license-built Ju-86K of German origin with radial engines) was built. About 30 pre-production airframes were finished or under construction, but lacked an appropriate engine!
With only half of a promising aircraft at hand and the dire need for fighters, the Swedish government decided to outfit these initial aircraft with non-license-built Wright R-2600-6 Twin Cyclone radial engines with an output of 1.600 hp (1.194 kW). The fuselage-mounted machine guns were deleted, due to the lack of internal space and in order to save weight, and the modified machines were designated J 19B. This was only a stop-gap solution, though. P&W Twin Wasp engines had also been considered as a potential power plant (resulting in the J 19C), but the US didn't want to sell any engines at that time to Sweden and this variant never materialized.
An initial batch of 24 J 19B aircraft was eventually completed and delivered to F3 at Lidköping in late 1940, while airframe construction was kept up at small pace, but only seven more J 19Bs were completed with R-2600 engines. Uncompleted airframes were left in stock for spares, and further production was halted in mid 1941, since the engine question could not be solved sufficiently.
The J 19B proved to be a controversial aircraft, not only because of its dubious engine. While it was basically a fast and agile aircraft, the heavy R-2600 engine was rather cumbersome and not suited for a fighter. Handling in the air as well as on the ground was demanding, due to the concentration of weight at the aircraft’s front – several J 19Bs tipped over while landing. As a consequence, the J 19B simply could not live up to its potential and was no real match for modern and more agile fighters like the Bf 109 or the Spitfire – but the Swedish equipment shortages kept the machines in service throughout WWII, even though primarily in a ground attack role and fulfilling other secondary line duties.
Towards the end of WWII, the J 19’s intended role was eventually filled by the indigenous FFVS J 22 fighter – ironically, it was outfitted with a license-built P&W Twin Wasp. By that time, about forty J 19 airframes were more or less complete, just lacking a proper engine. Mounting the now available Twin Wasp to these had seriously been considered, but the aircraft’s performance would not suffice anymore. Consequently, a thorough modification program for the J 19 was started in late 1944, leading to the post-WWII J 19D.
The J 19D was another stopgap program, though, and the economical attempt to bring the fighter’s performance on par with contemporary fighters like the American P-47 or the P-51; both of these types had been tested and considered for procurement, and the P-51 was eventually ordered in early 1945 from US surplus stock as the J 26, even though deliveries were postponed until 1946. The J 19D was to bridge the time until the J 26 was fully introduced, and would later serve in the attack role.
Since the J 19 airframe could not take a large and powerful radial engine like the R-2800, Saab made a radical move and decided to integrate an inline engine – despite the need for some fundamental changes to the airframe. The choice fell on the Packard V-1650, the same engine that also powered the J 26 fighters, so that procurement, maintenance and logistics could be streamlined.
Integration of the very different engine necessitated a complete re-design of the engine attachment architecture, a new, streamlined cowling and the addition of a relatively large radiator bath under the fuselage. A new four blade propeller was introduced and enlarged, all-metal stabilizers were integrated, too, in order to compensate the changed aerodynamics induced by the new radiator arrangement (which made the aircraft pitch down in level flight). A new bubble canopy with minimal framing was introduced, too, offering a much better all-round field of view for the pilot.
Even though the inline engine had a lower nominal output than the J 19B’s heavy R-2600, performance of the J 19D improved appreciably and it became, thanks to improved aerodynamics, a better overall weight distribution, more agile – finally living up to its original design plans, even though its performance was still not outstanding.
Armament was upgraded, too: the inner pair of wing-mounted 13.2mm machine guns was replaced by 20mm Bofors cannons (license-built Hispano-Suiza HS.404), considerably improving weapon range and firepower. Under the outer wings, hardpoints could take a pair of 250 kg bombs, 300 l drop tanks or up to eight 50 kg bombs and/or unguided missiles.
After WWII, the J 19B survivors were kept in service and soldiered on until 1948, when all remaining aircraft were scrapped. Wright was also paid the overdue license fees for the originally unlicensed engines. The J 19D served together with the J 22 and J 26 fighters until 1950, when all of these piston engine fighters were gradually replaced by de Havilland Vampires (J 28) and the indigenous J 29 Tunnan, which rapidly brought the Swedish Air Force into the jet age. The last four J 19Ds, used as liaison aircraft at F 8 at Barkarby, were retired in 1954.
Saab J 19A General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 9.68 m (31 ft 8 1/2 in)
Wingspan: 12.0 m (39 ft 4 in)
Height: 3.05 m (10 ft 0 in)
Wing area: 22.44 m² (241.5 ft²)
Empty weight: 1,630 kg (3,590 lb)
Loaded weight: 2,390 kg (5,264 lb)
Aspect ratio: 6.4
Powerplant:
1× Packard V-1650-7 liquid-cooled V-12, with a 2 stage intercooled supercharger,
rated at 1,490 hp (1,111 kW) at 3,000 rpm
Performance
Maximum speed: 640 km/h (397 mph) at 4.550 m (14.930 ft)
Cruise speed: 380 km/h (236 mph)
Landing speed: 140 km/h (90 mph)
Range: 1.500 km (930 mi; 810 nmi)
Service ceiling: 11.800 m (38.650 ft)
Rate of climb: 15.9 m/s (3,125 ft/min)
Armament:
2× 20 mm Bofors (Hispano-Suiza HS.404) cannons with 120 RPG
2× 13.2 mm (0.53 in) M/39A (Browning M2) machine guns with 500 RPG
Underwing hardpoints for an ordnance of 500 kg (1.100 lb), including a pair of 300 l drop tanks,
two 250 kg (550 lb) bombs, eight 50 kg (110 lb) bombs or eight unguided missiles.
The kit and its assembly
This is actually the second J 19 I have converted from a Hobby Boss A6M – and this build addresses two questions that probably nobody ever asked:
● What would a Mitsubishi Zero with an inline engine look like?
● Could the fictional Swedish aircraft have survived WWII, and in which form?
The Saab J 19 never saw the hardware stage, but it was a real life project that was eventually killed through the outbreak of WWII and the lack of engines mentioned in the background above. Anyway, it was/is called the “Swedish Zero” because it resembled the Japanese fighter VERY much – wing shape, fuselage, tail section, even the cockpit glazing!
This build/conversion was very similar to my first one, which ended up as a J 19B with an R-2600 engine from a Matchbox B-25 Mitchell bomber. However, due to the later time frame and different donor parts at hand things took a different route – this time, the key idea was the modernization/update of a rather outdated airframe, and the old J 19B model was the benchmark.
Again, much of the literally massive(!) Hobby Boss Zero was taken OOB, but changes this time included:
● The nose/cowling from a Matchbox P-51D
● A modified ventral radiator bath from a HUMA Me 309
● New horizontal stabilizers from a Griffon Spitfire
● A new propeller (Pavla resin parts for a post WWII P-51D/K with uncuffed blades)
● OOB main landing gear was inverted, so that the wheel discs face inwards
● New main wheels from an AZ Models Spitfire, IIRC
● New retractable tail wheel, from a Bf 109 G; the arrestor hook opening was closed
● A vacu canopy for a late mark Hawker Typhoon, plus some interior details behind the seat
In order to adapt the Mustang’s nose to the slender and circular A6M fuselage, a wedge plug was inserted between the fuselage halves from the Matchbox kit and a styrene tube added inside as a propeller mount. The latter, a resin piece, received a long metal axis and can spin freely.
For the new bubble canopy the cockpit opening and the basic interior was retained, but the dorsal section around the cockpit re-sculpted with putty. Took some time, but worked well and everything blends surprisingly well into each other – even though the aircraft, with its new engine, somehow reminds me of a Hawker Hurricane now? From certain angles the whole thing also has a P-39 touch? Weird!
Painting and markings
Again the dire question: how to paint this one? Once more I did not want to use a typical olive green/light blue Swedish livery, even though it would have been the most plausible option. I eventually settled for a pure natural metal finish, inspired by the post-WWII J 26/Mustangs in Swedish service, which furthermore carried only minimal tactical markings: roundels in six positions, the Flygflottilj number on the fuselage and a colored letter code on the tail, plus a spinner in the same color. Very simple and plain, but with more and more Swedish whiffs piling up, I am looking for as much camouflage/livery diversity as possible, and an NMF machine was still missing. :D
All interior surfaces were painted in RLM 02, and for the NMF I used my personal “recipe” with a basis of Revell 99 (Aluminum, acrylics) plus a black ink wash, followed by panel post-shading with Humbrol “Polished Aluminum” Metallizer (27002), rubbing/polishing with a soft cotton cloth and finally and a light rubbing treatment with grinded graphite for weathering effects and a worn, metallic shine of the surfaces.
Around the exhaust stubs, slightly darker panels were painted with Revell Acyrlics 91 (Iron) and ModelMaster Magnesium Metallizer. A black anti glare panel was added in front of the cockpit (P-51 style). The green propeller boss was painted with a mix of Humbrol 3 and 131 – emulating the color of the green code letter on the fin as good as possible.
The decals were puzzled together; the bright roundels belong to a Swedish Fiat CR.42, from a Sky Models sheet. The “8” on the fuselage comes from an early WWII Swedish Gloster Gladiator code (SBS Models), while the green “E” is an RAF code letter from a Heller Supermarine Spitfire Mk. XVI – actually a total print color disaster, since this deep green is supposed to be Sky!? For better contrast on the Aluminum the letter was placed on a white background, created from single decal strips (generic material from TL Modellbau).
After some soot stains around the exhaust stubs and the fuselage flanks with more graphite, as well as around the gun muzzles, the kit was sealed with a 4:1 mix of gloss and matt acrylic varnish, only the anti glare panel and the propeller blades became 100% matt. Some more matt varnish was also dabbed over the soot stains.
So, another J 19, and the “Zero with an inline engine” looks pretty strange – not as streamlined as other late WWII designs like the P-51 or Griffon-powered Spitfires, yet with a modern touch. The NMF livery looks a bit boring, but the unusual green code (used by liason J 26s from F 8 and some rare 4th or 5th divisions) is a nice contrast to the bright and large Swedish roundels, underlining the pretty elegant lines of the converted Zero!