View allAll Photos Tagged extrapolated
I was procrastinating on some work I had to do, and I was looking at Mavis fanart*, and the Lego version of her just kinda popped into my head. I ran off and built her, and she looks worse than she did in my head, so she's a W.I.P. Anyway, comments and constructive criticism are welcome.
Recipe:
Hair: Irina Spalko - Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Head: Spooky Girl - CMF # 12
Body: Spooky Girl - CMF # 12
Arms: Video Game Guy - CMF # 12
Legs: Spooky Girl - CMF # 12
Links:
*For those of you who don't know who Mavis is, I suggest reading the Wikipedia article on the movie Hotel Transylvania, and also, going out and actually watching the movie, which is by an awesome dude by the name of Genndy Tartakovsky. He is famous in nerd circles for his animation skills, and he has created/worked on/co-created some critically acclaimed cartoons, like Dexter's Laboratory, Samurai Jack, and Star Wars: The Clone Wars, which actually has a Lego line in and of itself already. In any case, I am a fan of the movie, and I highly recommend it. In terms of content, it resembles something like Monster Fighters, because it uses "classic" movie monsters and extrapolates on their lives.
Elliott P. Montgomery, Chris Woebken, Natsuki Hayashi
extrapolationfactory.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/futures-cap...
Full Documentation:
Wandering around University of Toronto, a bit miffed because my planned shots were thwarted by the Pan Am Games closures, I came across this war memorial.
From the University of St. Michael's College web site:
Over 3401 St. Michael’s Alumni served in the military in the ‘Great War’; 32 died in the line of duty. These numbers may not seem remarkable until one reads the ‘Honour Roll’ in the SMC Year Book of 1918. It is there that Fr. Michael J. Oliver, CSB, 1T0 (BA), teacher and administrator of the high school, and Secretary of the ‘Honour Roll’ tells us some rather astonishing figures. From the school’s inception in 1852, the student body was relatively small, usually numbering 100 to 150 in total. Fr. Oliver states, “only recently, (1910?) owing to an increase in the number of Toronto students, has the number exceeded 200” – now remember this was written in 1918, so even if we extrapolate growth we probably would not exceed 225-235.
As well, again quoting Fr. Oliver, “St. Michael’s students/graduates were to a great extent prevented from enlisting by reason of their ‘office’. This affected only college students who, as priests and theological students, had taken ‘orders’. Yet Fr. Oliver says, “we have no hesitation in saying that the following list is not more than half the full number because no organized effort was made to make the list complete.”
We must also bear in mind another major fact – up until probably 1900-1910 the student body had significant numbers of Americans. Fr. Oliver says, “In 1905, 30% were from the U.S.; in 1895, 50% and prior to that even a larger number”.
It is important here to note therefore, volunteers to the U.S. military are, in the main, not included in the data presented. It was on 2nd February 1917, that President Woodrow Wilson severed diplomatic relations with Germany et al. Subsequently, when the Germans promised aid to Mexico should the Mexicans attack the United States (and British intelligence ensured that the Americans would see this), President Wilson and the U.S. Congress declared war on the 7th April 1917. We shall come back to this matter further on.
No form of remembrance for the fallen was provided, until in 1945, St. Michael’s and the Basilian Fathers decided to erect a memorial to all Alumni killed in the Great War. Time passed, but nothing really happened for nearly 40 years. In 1921, The University of Toronto published a Roll of Service 1914-1918 and a ‘Roll of Honour’ for those ‘Killed in Action’ or ‘Died in Service’, but this only encompassed those enrolled in University / College – our High School volunteers and those who died in service received no equal remembrance. As well, Hart House Soldiers Tower on the University campus created its ‘Memorial Archway’ where the names of the known dead from all colleges and faculties are enshrined. (Newman Chapel [St. Thomas Aquinas] also has a small remembrance plaque).
However, in late 1985 Fr. William H. O’Brien CSB, 4T3; Lieutenant (Rt’d) Royal Canadian Artillery, decided that such a remembrance had to come to fruition (See Appendix ‘A’). He became the moving spirit that culminated in the memorial carved into the stone of the ‘slype’ between More and Fisher Houses and dedicated to the memory of the 32 alumni of both College and High School who died. It was completed in the November 1988 in time for the Remembrance Day service on 11 November.
Subsequently, Fr. Bill, who in retirement had become the archivist at St. Michael’s College School, had a similar ‘Remembrance Wall’ put in place on the outside west wall of the College School chapel. It was dedicated in 2000, a year and a half after his death.
St. Michael's College Memorial to the Fallen
If you were to travel to Northern France and Belgium you would find the many memorials in the hundreds of cemeteries that dot the countryside. They hold the graves of most of the more than 66,655 Canadians who never returned from the ‘Great War’ - with close to a third resting in unidentified or unknown graves. The names of those known are cut into their headstones; others show ‘A Soldier of the Great War’ above the cross, and below ‘Known Unto God’. All with no known graves have their names incised in the newly refurbished main memorial at Vimy Ridge (approx 19,000+). As well, there are many war dead, including Canadian, who are buried in multicultural, local church cemeteries and cemeteries of many other mid and northern European countries.
The original High Dynamic Range 360° panorama was stitched from 162 bracketed photographs with PTGUI Pro, tone-mapped with Photomatix, processed with Color Efex, then touched up in Aperture.
Cropped size: 8115 × 6084 (49.4 MP; 1.04 GB).
Location: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Washington, D.C. (est. 1790, pop. ~690,000)
• Ford’s Theatre, site of assassination of U.S. President Abraham Lincoln
• onlookers gather around reporters & actors at red carpet preview of the movie, “The Conspirator” (2010), story of Mary Surratt, lone female charged as a co-conspirator in Lincoln assassination
• theater’s site previously occupied by First Baptist Church of Washington (1834) [photo] • services held until 1859 • John Thompson Ford, Baltimore theatrical manager, leased the church bldg., converted it into a theatre • inaugurated Dec., 1861 as The "George Christy Opera House," presenting popular blackface troupe, Christy’s Minstrels
• following their final performance 27 Feb., 1862, further renovations made for presentation of theatrical (rather than musical) plays • 3 wks. later venue, renamed “Ford’s Atheneum,” entered Washington’s Civil War theater scene • presented excellent companies & first rate stars • Pres. Lincoln first attended Ford's on 28 May, 1862 • venue was profitable until the evening of 30 Dec, 1862, when it burned
• 2 mos.later, the cornerstone of a new theater was laid on this site by James J. Gifford, chief carpenter, architect & builder • the brick structure, modeled after the Late Victorian-style design of Baltimore’s Holliday Street Theatre [photo], seated ~1,700 w/ 8 private boxes, two upper, two lower, located on either side of stage
• opened evening of 27 Aug., 1863 with “The Naiad Queen,” a "Fairy Opera" [photo] presented to a capacity audience • became one of the most successful entertainment venues in Washington —Ford’s Theatre, National Historic Site
• as Ford’s ventures prospered, a future competitor was making history • Mary Francis Moss was born, 1826, in Winchester, England • during childhood was a frequent visitor to the studio of "old man" J.M.W, Turner, the celebrated painter —The Life of Laura Keene [photo]
• married at age 18 to former British Army officer, Henry Wellington Taylor • 7 yr. marriage produced 2 daughters • husband was arrested for an undocumented crime, sent to Australia on a prison ship • to support her family, Mary Taylor became British stage actress Laura Keene, who made her professional debut in London, Oct., 1851 —Wikipedia
• in 1852, less than a year into her acting career, accepted an offer from impresario J.W. Wallack to travel to New York City, to audition for leading lady of the Wallack’s Theater stock company • became a popular star performer [photo] • began considering a move into an entrepreneurial role
• took over Baltimore's Charles Street Theatre, 24 Dec, 1853, w/ financial assistance from wealthy Washingtonian, John Lutz • managed it for 2 months, qualifying her as USA’s first female theater manager • Lutz became her business manager & by some unverifiable accounts, her husband, though she was still married to Taylor — Androom Archives
• moved to San Francisco & the Metropolitan Theatre [photo] • played opposite Edwin Booth, brother of John Wilkes Booth • toured Australia with Edwin, 1854
• by 1855 she had returned to NYC • retained architect, John M. Trimble, a theater specialist • the new theater, built to her specifications, was named the Laura Keene’s Varieties [photo], aka Laura Keene’s Theatre [photo], or Third Olympic Theatre • opened at 622 Broadway on 18 Nov., 1856 • managed by Keene until 1863 when she assumed the lease & took over D.C.’s Washington Theatre [photo] [ad] from lessee, manager & self-proclaimed “People’s Favorite Tragedian,” John Wilkes Booth
• in 1858, having returned to Laura Keene's Theatre in NYC, premiered Our American Cousin,” [script] a 3-act farce starring Laura Keene [photo], written by English playwright Tom Taylor, U.S./Canada rights owned by Keene • with a run of 150 nights, set new standards for New York theater
• synopsis: a coarse but honest American, Asa Trenchard, arrives at the British Trenchard estate to claim an inheritance as the last named heir • meets Lord Dundreary & other snooty relatives who are trying to keep up appearances & marry off daughters • servants gossip, villains emerge from the shadows, true love conquers all in the end, a farce satirizing pretension & manners —Helytimes
• this is the play Laura Keene chose for her 14 Apr., 1865 Ford’s Theatre engagement, a benefit & farewell performance [ad] for the beloved star [playbill] • “Our Leading Lady,” is a 2007 comedy inspired by Keene’s role in the events surrounding this performance
• Laura Keene would play her usual role as Trenchard’s wife, Florence • Harry Hawk [photo], a member of Keene’s NY company, was to play the boorish American, Asa Trenchard • the classic role of brainless aristocrat Lord Dundreary was given to Edwin "Ned" Emerson [photo], leading man in the Ford Stock Company, brother of a Confederate soldier killed in action in 1862 & close friend of John Wilkes Booth
"I knew John Wilkes Booth well," wrote Edwin Emerson, "having played with him in dozens of cities, throughout the East and Middle West. He was a kind-hearted, genial person, and no cleverer gentleman ever lived. Everybody loved him on the stage, though he was a little excitable and eccentric."
• while Ford's was presenting Keene's famous play, arch-rival Grover's Theatre aka Grover’s National Theatre, offered “Aladin and The Wonderful Lamp” • Leonard Grover advertised his theatre as the capital’s only “Union” playhouse, highlighting John Ford’s more “Secesh” (secessionist) sentiments • “Doubtless [Ford’s] personal sympathies were with his State and with that portion of the country in which he was born and reared.” —Leonard Grover
• according to Grover, during the four years of [Lincoln’s] administration, he visited his theater “probably more than a hundred times. He often came alone, many times brought his little son Tad, and on special occasions, Mrs. Lincoln.” The President also once told Grover, ”I really enjoy a minstrel show," • when Grover responded that Hooley's Minstrels [photo] were soon to appear, Lincoln laughed. "Well, that was thoughtful of you." • “[Lincoln] was exceedingly conversant with Shakespeare. He enjoyed a classical representation, of which I gave many” —Lincoln's Interest in the Theater, Leonard Grover
• the National’s policy of segregating blacks began when it opened in 1835 • a portion of the gallery was set apart for "persons of color" • it is not known how many black theatergoers were in the 5 Mar., 1845 audience for “Beauty & the Beast,” “Stage Struck Nigger” & the Congo Melodists, a Boston blackface minstrel group [photo], but Washington’s 7 Mar. “National lntelligencer” reported that the cause of the fire which had demolished the theatre on the 5th was "a candle without a stick left burning on a table by a negro...."
• although the Grover-managed version of the National also had its "colored parterre,” Ford's Theatre, excluded blacks entirely from its performances • the exclusion of black Washingtonians from public places in the nation’s capital helped secure the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1875 which, in 1889, the Supreme Court held unconstitutional. —The National Theatre in Washington: Buildings and Audiences, 1835-1972
• Mary Lincoln had tickets to Grover’s but preferred seeing Laura Keene in “Our American Cousin” • with little interest, the president said he would take care of the tickets • a messenger was sent to the theatre around 10:30 A.M. to secure the state box for the evening • the Lincolns’ son, Tad, opted for Grover’s, thus would not be with his parents at Ford’s that night
• General Grant accepted Lincoln’s invitation to join them in the Presidential box, but when Julia Grant objected to spending the evening with the sharp-tongued First Lady, he canceled • Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, Speaker of the House Schuyler Colfax & son Robert Todd Lincoln also declined before Clara Harris (1834-1883), daughter of New York Senator Ira Harris (1802-1875), and her fiancé, Major Henry Rathbone (1837-1911), accepted. —History Channel
The theatre as it appeared the night of Lincoln's assassination:
• the stage
• “Laura Keene was on stage with E, A. Emerson when the Presidents' party entered the theatre. As the party made its way, Miss Keene halted the play, Conductor William Withers [photo] led the orchestra in Hail to the Chief,'
and the audience rose and greeted the President with 'vociferous cheering.' President Lincoln came to the front of the box, acknowledged the reception, [set his silk hat on the floor], and the actors resumed where they had left off.
“The fatal shot was fired during the second scene of the third act. Laura Keene was standing in the first entrance (wing), stage right, facing the audience, awaiting her cue for the next scene
“On stage, just prior to the shooting, Mrs. Mountchessington was squelching Asa Trenchard: I am aware, Mr. Trenchard, you are not used to the manners of good society, and that alone will excuse the impertinence of which you have been guilty. (Exit)
“This left Asa Trenchard (Harry Hawk) alone on the stage… The audience was silent, expectantly awaiting the punch line from Asa. Miss Harris and Major Rathbone were ‘intently observing’ the scene on stage.The President ‘was leaning upon one hand, and with the other was adjusting a portion of the drapery‘ which hung at the side of the box opening. [photo]
“At this moment John Wilkes Booth stood silently in the shadows of the state box, four or five feet directly behind the President. Probably the last words heard by Lincoln were spoken by Harry Hawk:
“ASA: Don’t know the manners of good society, eh? Wal, I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old gal — you sockdologizing old mantrap.
“The audience roared. Then penetrating the laughter was the distinct sound of a shot. A puff of smoke drifted from the box, and Major Rathbone “saw through the smoke, a man between the door and the President. He ‘instantly sprang toward him,’ but the assassin wrested from his grasp and slashed Rathbone with a dagger across the left arm. Meanwhile, Harry Hawk looked up from the stage to see a man, knife in hand, leaping over the balustrade of the President's box onto the stage apron. Fearing he would be attacked Hawk ran off the stage.’ Booth ran across the stage, [illustration] brushed past Miss Keene in the wings…
—Harbin, Billy J. “Laura Keene at the Lincoln Assassination,” Educational Theatre Journal 18, no. 1 (1966): 47–54
• Edwin Emerson: “…near the beginning of the third act… I was standing in the wings, just behind a piece of scenery, waiting for my cue to go on, when I heard a shot. I was not surprised, nor was anyone else behind the scenes. Such sounds are too common during the shifting of the various sets to surprise an actor. For a good many seconds after that sound nothing happened behind the footlights. Then, as I stood there in the dimness, a man rushed by me, making for the stage door. I did not recognize Booth at the time, nor did anyone else, I think, unless, someone out on the stage, when he stood a moment and shouted with theatrical gesture, ‘Sic Semper Tyrannis!' (So perish all tyrants!) Even after he flashed by, there was quiet for a few moments among the actors and the stage hands. No one knew what had happened.”—Find a Grave
• running from the stage Booth exited the building into Baptist Alley, a public alleyway laid out in 1792 • grabbed the reins of his horse & rode off, turning right on F Street to head for the safety of of the Maryland night
• James S. Knox, witness: “…The shrill cry of murder from Mrs. Lincoln first roused the horrified audience, and in an instant the uproar was terrible. The silence of death was broken by shouts of "kill him," "hang him" and strong men wept, and cursed, and tore the seats in the impotence of their anger, while Mrs. Lincoln, on her knees uttered shriek after shriek at the feet of the dying President.” —Library of Congress
• video: Charles L. Willis, J.W. Epperson eyewitness accounts of the assassination
• according to legend, Laura Keene rushed to Lincoln’s box w/a pitcher of water • cradled his head, staining her cuff w/ his blood.
• The Night Lincoln Was Shot: Minute-by-Minute Backstage With John Wilkes Booth at Ford's Theatre
“In the lobby of Grover’s, as Tad Lincoln awaited his parents' carriage to take him back to the White House, he learned that his father had been shot • Grover, who was in New York, received a telegram from his associate manager: President shot tonight at Ford's Theatre. Thank God it wasn't ours. C. D. Hess."
“[two doctors] now arrived and after a moments consultation we agreed to have him removed to the nearest house… I called out twice 'Guards clear the passage,' which was so soon done that we proceeded… with the President and were not in the slightest interrupted until he was placed in bed in the house of Mr. Peterson… During the night the room was visited by many of his friends. Mrs Lincoln with Mrs. Senator Dixon came into the room three or four times during the night. The Presidents son Captn R. Lincoln, remained with his father during the greater part of the night.
“At 7.20 a.m. he breathed his last and “the spirit fled to God who gave it… Immediately after death had taken place, we all bowed and the Rev. Dr. Gurley supplicated to God in behalf of the bereaved family and our afflicted country.” —Report on the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln by Dr. Charles Leale [photo]
• Secy. of War Stanton ordered guards posted at the building [photo] & future dramatic productions canceled • later that year, attempts by Ford to reopen the theatre aroused public indignation • War Dept. ordered it closed, Ford threatened legal action, federal government responded by leasing & later purchasing the bldg.
• American newspapers report the shocking news in a country still younger than some of its citizens
• Willie Clark, the Petersen House boarder who lived in the room in which President Lincoln died, wrote to his sister four days after Lincoln's death...
“The past few days have been of intense excitement. Arrests are numerously made, of any party heard to utter secesh sentiments. The time has come when people cannot say what they please, the people are awfully indignant. Leinency is no longer to be thought of. A new code must be adopted.
“They talk of the tyranical administration of Mr. Lincoln, but we have a man now for a president who will teach the south a lesson they will know well how to appreciate…
“…Everybody has a great desire to obtain some memento from my room so that whoever comes in has to be closely watched for fear they will steal something.
“I have a lock of his hair which I have had neatly framed, also a piece of linen with a portion of his brain, the pillow and case upon which he lay when he died and nearly all his wearing apparel but the latter I intend to send to Robt. Lincoln as soon as the funeral is over, as I consider him the one most justly entitled to them.
“The same matrass (sic.) is on my bed, and the same coverlit (sic.) covers me nightly that covered him while dying.
“Enclosed you will find a piece of lace that Mrs. Lincoln wore on her head during the evening and was dropped by her while entering my room to see her dying husband It is worth keeping for its historical value.
“The cap worked by Clara and the cushion by you, you little dreamed would be so historically connected with such an event.”
“They talk of the tyranical administration of Mr. Lincoln, but we have a man now for a president who will teach the south a lesson they will know well how to appreciate. — Remembering Lincoln
• Lincoln's death was not universally mourned by Northeners even though his decision to resupply Ft. Sumter forced the Confederates into firing the 1st shots, an attack that triggered anger, patriotism & widespread support from Northerners • nevertheless, some who thought him too dictatorial & some Radical Republicans who thought him too lenient toward the enemy welcomed his assassination • Congressman George Julian recorded in his diary that the “universal feeling among radical men here is that his death is a godsend” Michigan Senator Zachariah Chandler wrote to his wife that God had permitted Lincoln to live only “as long as he was useful and then substituted a better man (Johnson) to finish the work.”—History Channel
• In the 2 wks. following the assassination, hundreds were detained, questioned, & some imprisoned • nearly all the personnel at Ford’s (actors, stage hands, musicians, etc.) were arrested & questioned • John T. Ford was visiting Richmond the night of the assassination • he & 2 brothers spent 39 days in the Old Capitol Prison before being cleared & released
• the Old Capitol Prison [photo] gained an association with the Lincoln assassination when it lodged several (but not all) suspected Lincoln assassination conspirators who, by order of the Secty. Of War, wore cotton hoods —Smithsonian
.
• 5 days after the assassination, Laura Keene & 2 other cast members arrested in Harrisburg PA, returned to Washington & released by order of the Secretary of War the moment he heard of their unauthorized detention
• Louis J. Weichmann often stayed at the Surratt Boarding House, in contact with the Surratts, & John Wilkes Booth • arrested as a potential accomplice but became a star witness for the prosecution, his testimony helping to convict Mary Surratt
• Pres. Andrew Johnson & Secy. of War Edwin M. Stanton insisted on trying the conspirators before a nine-member military commission, where 5 of the 9 judges—rather than a unanimous vote like in a civilian trial—were required to establish guilt. 6 votes could impose the death penalty
• Federal authorities argued that because Washington, D.C., was a war zone in April 1865—Confederate troops were still in the field—the assassination was an act of war • opponents argued that a civilian court would allow for a fairer trial [photo]
• for 7 weeks in May & June 1865, nation’s attention riveted on the 3rd floor of Old Arsenal Penitentiary (now Fort McNair) [photo], where the alleged conspirators were on trial for their lives [photo]
• one of the first U.S. trials where “colored” Americans, e.g. Ford’s stagehand Joe Simms & cleaner Mary Anderson, were allowed to testify against white Americans in open court • their testimony was included throughout the trial —Ford’s Theatre
• accused were allowed by attorneys to question the 366 witnesses, but not permitted to speak on their own behalf —Ford’s Theatre
• All defendants found guilty, 30 June, 1865 • Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, & George Atzerodt sentenced to death by hanging [photo]
• Samuel Mudd, Samuel Arnold, & Michael O'Laughlen sentenced to life in prison • Ford’s stagehand Edmund Spangler sentenced to 6 yrs. in prison •all incarcerated at Fort Jefferson, off of Key West, Florida, pardoned by Pres. Johnson, 1869.
• following the assassination, [photo]Ford attempted to reopen on 7 July, 1865 but public outcry & threats forced him to cancel the performance, issue refunds & close the still-unfinished theater • bldg. seized July, 1865 by order of the Secretary of War
• interior torn out in August, 1865 • converted into 3-story office bldg housing the Army Medical Museum & Surgeon General • used for govt. purposes for several decades. —Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site
• 40-foot section of the facade collapsed from the 3rd floor, killing 22 War Department personnel, 1893 • alterations, including the facade, 1894 • building repaired, continued as government warehouse & storeroom until 1911 • vacant until taken over by Office of Public Buildings & Public Parks of the National Capital, 1928 • Lincoln museum opened 12 Feb., 1932, 123rd anniversary of Lincoln’s birth
• bldg. transferred to National Parks Service through executive order, 1933 —Ford’s Theatre, Washington, D.C.
• funding for restoration approved, 1964 • original building plans lost • relied on investigative work to extrapolate floor levels & wall locations from known “good” points in the building, w/ photographs & drawings providing supplementary detail • project supervised by Charles W. Lessig • restoration to its 1865 appearance completed, 1968 • theatre reopened 30 Jan., 1968 • following restoration, Presidential Box never occupied. —Ford’s Theatre
• externally west facade & north & south walls remain of the original theatre, although subject to modification, repair & remodeling over time • rear (east) wall, site of Booth’s escape door, is completely rebuilt—Restoration of Ford’s Theatre, Washington
• now a popular tourist destination & working theatre presenting a varied schedule of theatrical & live entertainment events • over 650,000 visitors/yr.
• Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site National Register # 66000865, 1966
• Ford’s Theatre National Historic site, National Register # 66000034, 1966
Washington, D.C. (est. 1790, pop. ~690,000)
• Ford’s Theatre, site of assassination of U.S. President Abraham Lincoln
• onlookers gather around reporters & actors at red carpet preview of the movie, “The Conspirator” (2010), story of Mary Surratt, lone female charged as a co-conspirator in Lincoln assassination
• theater’s site previously occupied by First Baptist Church of Washington (1834) [photo] • services held until 1859 • John Thompson Ford, Baltimore theatrical manager, leased the church bldg., converted it into a theatre • inaugurated Dec., 1861 as The "George Christy Opera House," presenting popular blackface troupe, Christy’s Minstrels
• following their final performance 27 Feb., 1862, further renovations made for presentation of theatrical (rather than musical) plays • 3 wks. later venue, renamed “Ford’s Atheneum,” entered Washington’s Civil War theater scene • presented excellent companies & first rate stars • Pres. Lincoln first attended Ford's on 28 May, 1862 • venue was profitable until the evening of 30 Dec, 1862, when it burned
• 2 mos.later, the cornerstone of a new theater was laid on this site by James J. Gifford, chief carpenter, architect & builder • the brick structure, modeled after the Late Victorian-style design of Baltimore’s Holliday Street Theatre [photo], seated ~1,700 w/ 8 private boxes, two upper, two lower, located on either side of stage
• opened evening of 27 Aug., 1863 with “The Naiad Queen,” a "Fairy Opera" [photo] presented to a capacity audience • became one of the most successful entertainment venues in Washington —Ford’s Theatre, National Historic Site
• as Ford’s ventures prospered, a future competitor was making history • Mary Francis Moss was born, 1826, in Winchester, England • during childhood was a frequent visitor to the studio of "old man" J.M.W, Turner, the celebrated painter —The Life of Laura Keene [photo]
• married at age 18 to former British Army officer, Henry Wellington Taylor • 7 yr. marriage produced 2 daughters • husband was arrested for an undocumented crime, sent to Australia on a prison ship • to support her family, Mary Taylor became British stage actress Laura Keene, who made her professional debut in London, Oct., 1851 —Wikipedia
• in 1852, less than a year into her acting career, accepted an offer from impresario J.W. Wallack to travel to New York City, to audition for leading lady of the Wallack’s Theater stock company • became a popular star performer [photo] • began considering a move into an entrepreneurial role
• took over Baltimore's Charles Street Theatre, 24 Dec, 1853, w/ financial assistance from wealthy Washingtonian, John Lutz • managed it for 2 months, qualifying her as USA’s first female theater manager • Lutz became her business manager & by some unverifiable accounts, her husband, though she was still married to Taylor — Androom Archives
• moved to San Francisco & the Metropolitan Theatre [photo] • played opposite Edwin Booth, brother of John Wilkes Booth • toured Australia with Edwin, 1854
• by 1855 she had returned to NYC • retained architect, John M. Trimble, a theater specialist • the new theater, built to her specifications, was named the Laura Keene’s Varieties [photo], aka Laura Keene’s Theatre [photo], or Third Olympic Theatre • opened at 622 Broadway on 18 Nov., 1856 • managed by Keene until 1863 when she assumed the lease & took over D.C.’s Washington Theatre [photo] [ad] from lessee, manager & self-proclaimed “People’s Favorite Tragedian,” John Wilkes Booth
• in 1858, having returned to Laura Keene's Theatre in NYC, premiered Our American Cousin,” [script] a 3-act farce starring Laura Keene [photo], written by English playwright Tom Taylor, U.S./Canada rights owned by Keene • with a run of 150 nights, set new standards for New York theater
• synopsis: a coarse but honest American, Asa Trenchard, arrives at the British Trenchard estate to claim an inheritance as the last named heir • meets Lord Dundreary & other snooty relatives who are trying to keep up appearances & marry off daughters • servants gossip, villains emerge from the shadows, true love conquers all in the end, a farce satirizing pretension & manners —Helytimes
• this is the play Laura Keene chose for her 14 Apr., 1865 Ford’s Theatre engagement, a benefit & farewell performance [ad] for the beloved star [playbill] • “Our Leading Lady,” is a 2007 comedy inspired by Keene’s role in the events surrounding this performance
• Laura Keene would play her usual role as Trenchard’s wife, Florence • Harry Hawk [photo], a member of Keene’s NY company, was to play the boorish American, Asa Trenchard • the classic role of brainless aristocrat Lord Dundreary was given to Edwin "Ned" Emerson [photo], leading man in the Ford Stock Company, brother of a Confederate soldier killed in action in 1862 & close friend of John Wilkes Booth
"I knew John Wilkes Booth well," wrote Edwin Emerson, "having played with him in dozens of cities, throughout the East and Middle West. He was a kind-hearted, genial person, and no cleverer gentleman ever lived. Everybody loved him on the stage, though he was a little excitable and eccentric."
• while Ford's was presenting Keene's famous play, arch-rival Grover's Theatre aka Grover’s National Theatre, offered “Aladin and The Wonderful Lamp” • Leonard Grover advertised his theatre as the capital’s only “Union” playhouse, highlighting John Ford’s more “Secesh” (secessionist) sentiments • “Doubtless [Ford’s] personal sympathies were with his State and with that portion of the country in which he was born and reared.” —Leonard Grover
• according to Grover, during the four years of [Lincoln’s] administration, he visited his theater “probably more than a hundred times. He often came alone, many times brought his little son Tad, and on special occasions, Mrs. Lincoln.” The President also once told Grover, ”I really enjoy a minstrel show," • when Grover responded that Hooley's Minstrels [photo] were soon to appear, Lincoln laughed. "Well, that was thoughtful of you." • “[Lincoln] was exceedingly conversant with Shakespeare. He enjoyed a classical representation, of which I gave many” —Lincoln's Interest in the Theater, Leonard Grover
• the National’s policy of segregating blacks began when it opened in 1835 • a portion of the gallery was set apart for "persons of color" • it is not known how many black theatergoers were in the 5 Mar., 1845 audience for “Beauty & the Beast,” “Stage Struck Nigger” & the Congo Melodists, a Boston blackface minstrel group [photo], but Washington’s 7 Mar. “National lntelligencer” reported that the cause of the fire which had demolished the theatre on the 5th was "a candle without a stick left burning on a table by a negro...."
• although the Grover-managed version of the National also had its "colored parterre,” Ford's Theatre, excluded blacks entirely from its performances • the exclusion of black Washingtonians from public places in the nation’s capital helped secure the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1875 which, in 1889, the Supreme Court held unconstitutional. —The National Theatre in Washington: Buildings and Audiences, 1835-1972
• Mary Lincoln had tickets to Grover’s but preferred seeing Laura Keene in “Our American Cousin” • with little interest, the president said he would take care of the tickets • a messenger was sent to the theatre around 10:30 A.M. to secure the state box for the evening • the Lincolns’ son, Tad, opted for Grover’s, thus would not be with his parents at Ford’s that night
• General Grant accepted Lincoln’s invitation to join them in the Presidential box, but when Julia Grant objected to spending the evening with the sharp-tongued First Lady, he canceled • Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, Speaker of the House Schuyler Colfax & son Robert Todd Lincoln also declined before Clara Harris (1834-1883), daughter of New York Senator Ira Harris (1802-1875), and her fiancé, Major Henry Rathbone (1837-1911), accepted. —History Channel
The theatre as it appeared the night of Lincoln's assassination:
• the stage
• “Laura Keene was on stage with E, A. Emerson when the Presidents' party entered the theatre. As the party made its way, Miss Keene halted the play, Conductor William Withers [photo] led the orchestra in Hail to the Chief,'
and the audience rose and greeted the President with 'vociferous cheering.' President Lincoln came to the front of the box, acknowledged the reception, [set his silk hat on the floor], and the actors resumed where they had left off.
“The fatal shot was fired during the second scene of the third act. Laura Keene was standing in the first entrance (wing), stage right, facing the audience, awaiting her cue for the next scene
“On stage, just prior to the shooting, Mrs. Mountchessington was squelching Asa Trenchard: I am aware, Mr. Trenchard, you are not used to the manners of good society, and that alone will excuse the impertinence of which you have been guilty. (Exit)
“This left Asa Trenchard (Harry Hawk) alone on the stage… The audience was silent, expectantly awaiting the punch line from Asa. Miss Harris and Major Rathbone were ‘intently observing’ the scene on stage.The President ‘was leaning upon one hand, and with the other was adjusting a portion of the drapery‘ which hung at the side of the box opening. [photo]
“At this moment John Wilkes Booth stood silently in the shadows of the state box, four or five feet directly behind the President. Probably the last words heard by Lincoln were spoken by Harry Hawk:
“ASA: Don’t know the manners of good society, eh? Wal, I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old gal — you sockdologizing old mantrap.
“The audience roared. Then penetrating the laughter was the distinct sound of a shot. A puff of smoke drifted from the box, and Major Rathbone “saw through the smoke, a man between the door and the President. He ‘instantly sprang toward him,’ but the assassin wrested from his grasp and slashed Rathbone with a dagger across the left arm. Meanwhile, Harry Hawk looked up from the stage to see a man, knife in hand, leaping over the balustrade of the President's box onto the stage apron. Fearing he would be attacked Hawk ran off the stage.’ Booth ran across the stage, [illustration] brushed past Miss Keene in the wings…
—Harbin, Billy J. “Laura Keene at the Lincoln Assassination,” Educational Theatre Journal 18, no. 1 (1966): 47–54
• Edwin Emerson: “…near the beginning of the third act… I was standing in the wings, just behind a piece of scenery, waiting for my cue to go on, when I heard a shot. I was not surprised, nor was anyone else behind the scenes. Such sounds are too common during the shifting of the various sets to surprise an actor. For a good many seconds after that sound nothing happened behind the footlights. Then, as I stood there in the dimness, a man rushed by me, making for the stage door. I did not recognize Booth at the time, nor did anyone else, I think, unless, someone out on the stage, when he stood a moment and shouted with theatrical gesture, ‘Sic Semper Tyrannis!' (So perish all tyrants!) Even after he flashed by, there was quiet for a few moments among the actors and the stage hands. No one knew what had happened.”—Find a Grave
• running from the stage Booth exited the building into Baptist Alley, a public alleyway laid out in 1792 • grabbed the reins of his horse & rode off, turning right on F Street to head for the safety of of the Maryland night
• James S. Knox, witness: “…The shrill cry of murder from Mrs. Lincoln first roused the horrified audience, and in an instant the uproar was terrible. The silence of death was broken by shouts of "kill him," "hang him" and strong men wept, and cursed, and tore the seats in the impotence of their anger, while Mrs. Lincoln, on her knees uttered shriek after shriek at the feet of the dying President.” —Library of Congress
• video: Charles L. Willis, J.W. Epperson eyewitness accounts of the assassination
• according to legend, Laura Keene rushed to Lincoln’s box w/a pitcher of water • cradled his head, staining her cuff w/ his blood.
• The Night Lincoln Was Shot: Minute-by-Minute Backstage With John Wilkes Booth at Ford's Theatre
“In the lobby of Grover’s, as Tad Lincoln awaited his parents' carriage to take him back to the White House, he learned that his father had been shot • Grover, who was in New York, received a telegram from his associate manager: President shot tonight at Ford's Theatre. Thank God it wasn't ours. C. D. Hess."
“[two doctors] now arrived and after a moments consultation we agreed to have him removed to the nearest house… I called out twice 'Guards clear the passage,' which was so soon done that we proceeded… with the President and were not in the slightest interrupted until he was placed in bed in the house of Mr. Peterson… During the night the room was visited by many of his friends. Mrs Lincoln with Mrs. Senator Dixon came into the room three or four times during the night. The Presidents son Captn R. Lincoln, remained with his father during the greater part of the night.
“At 7.20 a.m. he breathed his last and “the spirit fled to God who gave it… Immediately after death had taken place, we all bowed and the Rev. Dr. Gurley supplicated to God in behalf of the bereaved family and our afflicted country.” —Report on the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln by Dr. Charles Leale [photo]
• Secy. of War Stanton ordered guards posted at the building [photo] & future dramatic productions canceled • later that year, attempts by Ford to reopen the theatre aroused public indignation • War Dept. ordered it closed, Ford threatened legal action, federal government responded by leasing & later purchasing the bldg.
• American newspapers report the shocking news in a country still younger than some of its citizens
• Willie Clark, the Petersen House boarder who lived in the room in which President Lincoln died, wrote to his sister four days after Lincoln's death...
“The past few days have been of intense excitement. Arrests are numerously made, of any party heard to utter secesh sentiments. The time has come when people cannot say what they please, the people are awfully indignant. Leinency is no longer to be thought of. A new code must be adopted.
“They talk of the tyranical administration of Mr. Lincoln, but we have a man now for a president who will teach the south a lesson they will know well how to appreciate…
“…Everybody has a great desire to obtain some memento from my room so that whoever comes in has to be closely watched for fear they will steal something.
“I have a lock of his hair which I have had neatly framed, also a piece of linen with a portion of his brain, the pillow and case upon which he lay when he died and nearly all his wearing apparel but the latter I intend to send to Robt. Lincoln as soon as the funeral is over, as I consider him the one most justly entitled to them.
“The same matrass (sic.) is on my bed, and the same coverlit (sic.) covers me nightly that covered him while dying.
“Enclosed you will find a piece of lace that Mrs. Lincoln wore on her head during the evening and was dropped by her while entering my room to see her dying husband It is worth keeping for its historical value.
“The cap worked by Clara and the cushion by you, you little dreamed would be so historically connected with such an event.”
“They talk of the tyranical administration of Mr. Lincoln, but we have a man now for a president who will teach the south a lesson they will know well how to appreciate. — Remembering Lincoln
• Lincoln's death was not universally mourned by Northeners even though his decision to resupply Ft. Sumter forced the Confederates into firing the 1st shots, an attack that triggered anger, patriotism & widespread support from Northerners • nevertheless, some who thought him too dictatorial & some Radical Republicans who thought him too lenient toward the enemy welcomed his assassination • Congressman George Julian recorded in his diary that the “universal feeling among radical men here is that his death is a godsend” Michigan Senator Zachariah Chandler wrote to his wife that God had permitted Lincoln to live only “as long as he was useful and then substituted a better man (Johnson) to finish the work.”—History Channel
• In the 2 wks. following the assassination, hundreds were detained, questioned, & some imprisoned • nearly all the personnel at Ford’s (actors, stage hands, musicians, etc.) were arrested & questioned • John T. Ford was visiting Richmond the night of the assassination • he & 2 brothers spent 39 days in the Old Capitol Prison before being cleared & released
• the Old Capitol Prison [photo] gained an association with the Lincoln assassination when it lodged several (but not all) suspected Lincoln assassination conspirators who, by order of the Secty. Of War, wore cotton hoods —Smithsonian
.
• 5 days after the assassination, Laura Keene & 2 other cast members arrested in Harrisburg PA, returned to Washington & released by order of the Secretary of War the moment he heard of their unauthorized detention
• Louis J. Weichmann often stayed at the Surratt Boarding House, in contact with the Surratts, & John Wilkes Booth • arrested as a potential accomplice but became a star witness for the prosecution, his testimony helping to convict Mary Surratt
• Pres. Andrew Johnson & Secy. of War Edwin M. Stanton insisted on trying the conspirators before a nine-member military commission, where 5 of the 9 judges—rather than a unanimous vote like in a civilian trial—were required to establish guilt. 6 votes could impose the death penalty
• Federal authorities argued that because Washington, D.C., was a war zone in April 1865—Confederate troops were still in the field—the assassination was an act of war • opponents argued that a civilian court would allow for a fairer trial [photo]
• for 7 weeks in May & June 1865, nation’s attention riveted on the 3rd floor of Old Arsenal Penitentiary (now Fort McNair) [photo], where the alleged conspirators were on trial for their lives [photo]
• one of the first U.S. trials where “colored” Americans, e.g. Ford’s stagehand Joe Simms & cleaner Mary Anderson, were allowed to testify against white Americans in open court • their testimony was included throughout the trial —Ford’s Theatre
• accused were allowed by attorneys to question the 366 witnesses, but not permitted to speak on their own behalf —Ford’s Theatre
• All defendants found guilty, 30 June, 1865 • Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, & George Atzerodt sentenced to death by hanging [photo]
• Samuel Mudd, Samuel Arnold, & Michael O'Laughlen sentenced to life in prison • Ford’s stagehand Edmund Spangler sentenced to 6 yrs. in prison •all incarcerated at Fort Jefferson, off of Key West, Florida, pardoned by Pres. Johnson, 1869.
• following the assassination, [photo]Ford attempted to reopen on 7 July, 1865 but public outcry & threats forced him to cancel the performance, issue refunds & close the still-unfinished theater • bldg. seized July, 1865 by order of the Secretary of War
• interior torn out in August, 1865 • converted into 3-story office bldg housing the Army Medical Museum & Surgeon General • used for govt. purposes for several decades. —Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site
• 40-foot section of the facade collapsed from the 3rd floor, killing 22 War Department personnel, 1893 • alterations, including the facade, 1894 • building repaired, continued as government warehouse & storeroom until 1911 • vacant until taken over by Office of Public Buildings & Public Parks of the National Capital, 1928 • Lincoln museum opened 12 Feb., 1932, 123rd anniversary of Lincoln’s birth
• bldg. transferred to National Parks Service through executive order, 1933 —Ford’s Theatre, Washington, D.C.
• funding for restoration approved, 1964 • original building plans lost • relied on investigative work to extrapolate floor levels & wall locations from known “good” points in the building, w/ photographs & drawings providing supplementary detail • project supervised by Charles W. Lessig • restoration to its 1865 appearance completed, 1968 • theatre reopened 30 Jan., 1968 • following restoration, Presidential Box never occupied. —Ford’s Theatre
• externally west facade & north & south walls remain of the original theatre, although subject to modification, repair & remodeling over time • rear (east) wall, site of Booth’s escape door, is completely rebuilt—Restoration of Ford’s Theatre, Washington
• now a popular tourist destination & working theatre presenting a varied schedule of theatrical & live entertainment events • over 650,000 visitors/yr.
• Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site National Register # 66000865, 1966
• Ford’s Theatre National Historic site, National Register # 66000034, 1966
Sculpture by Juan Sajid Imao
Unveiled on February 05, 2004
The 40 Foot Brass statue of Lapu-Lapu is gift from Korea Freedom League to the Filipino people.
Standing Guard means Tikas Pahinga
The sword he is holding is called Kampilan.
The Filipino shield is called "Kalasag"
The head piece is called "Putong", a piece of cloth tied around the forehead. Colored red are only worn by Raja / Datu and Warriors who made a kill in the battle.
The colorful embroidered "Putong" are only worn by Datu or Raja.
The Statue of the Sentinel of Freedom walking distance behind Rizal Monument
Brain child project of former Tourism Secretary Richard Gordon
Kwon Jung-dal is the Chairman of Korean Freedom League.
Kwon Jung-dal is a retired Army General
Lapu-Lapu head relief was featured on a obverse side of 1 Centavo Coins of the Philippines that no longer circulated.
No written record for the cause of death of Lapu-lapu
April 27 is Adlaw ni Lapu-Lapu or Philippine National Day of Lapu-Lapu
The wife of Lapu-Lapu is Pricesa Bulaklak (Princcesa Bulakna or Princesa Juana ) daughter of Datu Sabtano
During the Magellan attack on Mactan Island Lapu-Lapu strategically made the center formation the weakest and the two outer wing the strongest.
Lap-Lapu hit Magellan on the leg in the Battle of Mactan.
Photo by ROMMEL T. BANGIT, All rights reserved.
[ ROMMEL T. BANGIT ] I want to see the world countries like Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo, Democratic Republic of the (Zaire) Congo, Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea nEritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe (French) Guam (USA) Guatemala Guinea Guinea Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Ivory Coast (Cote D`Ivoire) Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique (French) Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia (French) New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Island Poland Polynesia French) Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands South Korea Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste (East Timor) Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands Wallis and Futuna Islands Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe to my Front yard.
abandon abandonallhope abandoned abbagliare abby abc abduced abe abelincoln abelnightroad abigail abigfave abilties abitboney abitof abitofastretch abitred abittooabstract abnormal aboard aboretum about above abovenewmexico abovethehorizon abraham abrahamlincoln abrewin abritrary abs abscence absense absolute absolutely absolutelyfree abst abstracción abstract abstractabstract abstractaliscious abstractart abstractartaward abstracted abstractedness abstracting abstractingly abstraction abstractionphilia abstractions abstractiveness abstractivity abstractly abstractor abstracts abstractspace abstrict abstroct abstruct abtractly abusador academic academy academyofmanagement acceptance access accident accidently accomadate accomodations accomplished accordeon accordian accounting acehotel achdulieber acheapplasticcamerathatsnotcheap acheive acheivement ackward aclass aclassphoto acording acoustic acousticguitar acres across act action actionbastard activities actor actress actual actualy acuracy acustom acute ad ada adad adam adams adamsfamily adapt adaptation adapter adaption adaptive add addamsfamily addict additive addres adition adjective adjustable adjustment admire adn adobe adopt adoption adorable adore adquire adrian adrianbelew ads adult adults adultswim adventchildren advertisement advertising advice aerial aerialballet aerialcloud aerialpandemoniumballet aerialshot aero aerodynamic aerodynamical aerodynamics aeroplane aerospace aesop aesthetic aesthetically af afar afarensis affair affairoftheheart afghanistan aflowerajokeand2pintsofale afraidtoask africa african after afterdinner aftermath aftermidnight afternnon afternoon afterthefire agains against age agency agent agents ageofconan agfa aggression aging agnar agreing agricultural agriculture agua ahead ahev aid aim aimhigh aintnomountainhighenough aintnosunshinewhenshesgone air airandspacemuseum airconditioner aircraft airfield airforce airforce1 airforceone airlify airline airlines airmuseum airplane airplanehangar airplanemuseum airplanes airplaneseat airplanewindow airpollution airport airspacemuseum airsupply airwave airwaves airways aisle aizona ajax ajisukitakahikone akasaka akatsuki aktzin alanparsonsproject alanrickman alarming alastor albert alberteinstein albright album albumart albumcover albumcoverart albums alcatraz alcohal alcohol alcoran aldo alege alemichigan alessonbeforedying alex alfredhitchcock algae algore algorithm alhirt alice aliceinwonderland alicelegrow alien alienversuspredator alienvpredator alittletouchofschmilssoninthenight alivekicking all allaboard allabstracted allah allan alledge allen allergic allergy allerton alley allflash allied alligator allineed allmychildren allmymodelsareplastic allmymodelsareplasticstudio allmymodelsareplasticstudios allrightnow alluring allyear allyouneedislove alma almostfocused alone along alot alpacino alphabet alqur’ān already alreadybroken alright alter alteration altered alternate alternative alternativeenergy altgeld altho altitude altocumulous altocumulus alucard aluminium alumni alviso always alwayssomethingtheretoremindme alwyas am amateur amateurphoto amateurphotography amateurs amatuer amature amazement amazing amazingamateur amazingshots amazingtalent amber ambisagrus amenities america american americana americandream americanflag americaninparis americanlegion americans amintiri ammap ammapstudios ammend amount amountain amphibian ampm ampolo ampoule ampul amsterdam amstersm amu amusement amy amylee ana anaheim anaintercontinental anaintercontinentaltokyo analog analogie analogue analysis analytics anawesomeshot ancient andiego rommelstillhyper ndreprevin andrew android andy angel angelinajolie angle angled angles anglesanglesangles anglican anglicanrite angry angrybird angrybirds angrycloud angular anhydrous anicent animal animals animated animation animator anime animeconvention animecosplay anish anishkapoor anita anitabryant anitaday annabelle anniversary annotation annual another anothercloudshot anothersunset ansel answer antenna anthony anticipation antiinaugurationparty antilight antinque antinques antique antiquecandymachine antiquecar antisemitism antithesis antiwar antler antoinette antonia ants anuary anuhwere anxiety any anywhere apache apachejunction apachemuffler apartment ape aperature aperiodic aphotos api aplenty aplu aplusphoto apneamask apocalypse apocatequil apollo apon aporro apostle app apparent appeal appealing appendage apperance appetizer apple applecomputer apples appleseed applestore appliances appreciation approach april apron aqua aquarium arboretum arbus arc arcade arch archduchess arched archetype archetypical archicture archiecture architect architects architectural architecture archive archway arcs arduino area arena arewenotmen areyounowhomefree areyouorange arial arid ariel aril arirt arist arizoan arizona arizonacenter arizonaclouds arizonacomicon arizonaforesthighway39 arizonahighcountry arizonahighway arizonalomo arizonalomography arizonamills arizonaprogress arizonarain arizonasky arizonastate arizonastatefair arizonastateuniversity arizonastateuniversityskysong arizonaufo arkansas arlington arlingtonwest arm armed armless army around aroundthebend aroundthecorner aroundthepeaks arrancar array arrest arrested arrives arrow art artbwblack artcenter artdeco artelligentcity artevokesemotion artic article artifact artificial artinbw artinstitute artinstituteofchicago artisitic artisserious artist artiste artistic artisticvision artistoftheyearlevel2 artistoftheyearlevel3 artistoftheyearlevel4 artistoftheyearlevel5 artistoftheyearlevel6 artists artjack artmuseum arts artsy artwork asadvertisedontv asbtractionphobia ascending ascent ascii asian ask asleep aslo ass assassinscreed assault asseenatcomiccon assemblassembledmultitude assembly assent assistance assistant assocation assumption astarbyanyothername astray asu asuartmuseum asucampus asuskysong asymmetry atagefourteenshewasmarried atget atgofion athirst atlantis atm atmosphere atnight atomic atomiccomics atop atrium attach attack attackoftheclones attainable attedent attempt attendent attention atticus attplaza attractions attractive attractor attribute audience auditorium august auguste aunt aurora auroraborealis australia australopithecus austria austrian austrolipithicus authentic auto autograph automata automobile automotive autor autumn autumnal auxillary ava available ave aveneue avengers avenue avis avision avoid avondale awahtukee await awake awakening awan award awardgroup awards awareness awataukee awatuhkee away awe awesome awesomedude awesomeinformation awful awfulcrap awning axel axelerickson axis axle ayearofholidays az azabudai azakatonnerre azclouds azprogress azsky azstatefair azte azul
accelerated acclimated accompanied accomplished achieved acquired acted activated actuated adapted added addressed adhered adjusted administered admitted adopted advanced advertised advised advocated aided aired affected allocated altered amended amplified analyzed answered anticipated appointed appraised approached approved arbitrated arranged ascertained asked assembled assigned assumed assessed assisted attained attracted audited augmented authored authorized automated awarded avail balanced bargained borrowed bought broadened budgeted built XXX calculated canvassed capitalized captured carried out cast cataloged centralized challenged chaired changed channeled charted checked chose circulated clarified classified cleared closed co-authored cold called collaborated collected combined commissioned committed communicated compared compiled complied completed composed computed conceived conceptualized concluded condensed conducted conferred consolidated constructed consulted contracted contrasted contributed contrived controlled converted convinced coordinated corrected corresponded counseled counted created critiqued cultivated cut XXX debugged decided decentralized decreased deferred defined delegated delivered demonstrated depreciated described designated designed determined developed devised devoted diagrammed directed disclosed discounted discovered dispatched displayed dissembled distinguished distributed diversified divested documented doubled drafted XXX earned eased edited effected elected eliminated employed enabled encouraged endorsed enforced engaged engineered enhanced enlarged enriched entered entertained established estimated evaluated examined exceeded exchanged executed exempted exercised expanded expedited explained exposed extended extracted extrapolated XXX facilitated familiarized fashioned fielded figured financed fit focused forecasted formalized formed formulated fortified found founded framed fulfilled functioned furnished gained gathered gauged gave generated governed graded granted greeted grouped guided handled headed hired hosted XXX identified illustrated illuminated implemented improved improvised inaugurated indoctrinated increased incurred induced influenced informed initiated innovated inquired inspected inspired installed instigated instilled instituted instructed insured interfaced interpreted interviewed introduced invented inventoried invested investigated invited involved isolated issued XXX joined judged launched lectured led lightened liquidated litigated lobbied localized located maintained managed mapped marketed maximized measured mediated merchandised merged met minimized modeled moderated modernized modified monitored motivated moved multiplied XXX named narrated negotiated noticed nurtured observed obtained offered offset opened operated operationalized orchestrated ordered organized oriented originated overhauled oversaw XXX paid participated passed patterned penalized perceived performed permitted persuaded phased out pinpointed pioneered placed planned polled prepared presented preserved presided prevented priced printed prioritized probed processed procured produced profiled programmed projected promoted promoted prompted proposed proved provided publicized published purchased pursued XXX quantified quoted raised ranked rated reacted read received recommended reconciled recorded recovered recruited rectified redesigned reduced referred refined regained regulated rehabilitated reinforced reinstated rejected related remedied remodeled renegotiated reorganized replaced repaired reported represented requested researched resolved responded restored restructured resulted retained retrieved revamped revealed reversed reviewed revised revitalized rewarded routed XXX safeguarded salvaged saved scheduled screened secured segmented selected sent separated served serviced settled shaped shortened showed shrank signed simplified sold solved spearheaded specified speculated spoke spread stabilized staffed staged standardized steered stimulated strategized streamlined strengthened stressed structured studied submitted substantiated substituted suggested summarized superseded supervised supplied supported surpassed surveyed synchronized synthesized systematized XXX tabulated tailored targeted taught terminated tested testified tightened took traced traded trained transacted transferred transformed translated transported traveled treated tripled uncovered undertook unified united updated upgraded used utilized validated valued verified viewed visited weighed welcomed widened witnessed won worked wrote
+++ 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 Char B1 was a French heavy tank manufactured before World War II. It was conceived as a specialized offensive vehicle, armed with a 75 mm howitzer in the hull. Later a 47 mm gun in a turret was added, to allow it to function also as a Char de Bataille, a ‘battle tank’ fighting enemy armour, equipping the armoured divisions of the Infantry Arm. Starting in the early twenties, its development and production were repeatedly delayed, resulting in a vehicle that was both technologically complex and expensive, and already obsolescent when real mass-production of a derived version, the Char B1 "bis", started in the late thirties.
The outer appearance of the Char B1 reflected the fact that development started in the twenties: like the very first tank, the British Mark I tank of World War I, it still had large tracks going around the entire hull and large armour plates protecting the suspension—and like all tanks of that decade it had no welded or cast hull armour. The similarity resulted partly from the fact that the Char B1 was a specialized offensive weapon, a break-through tank optimized for punching a hole into strong defensive entrenchments, so it was designed with good trench-crossing capabilities and therefore the hull and the tracks had considerable length. The French Army thought that dislodging the enemy from a key front sector would decide a campaign, and it prided itself on being the only army in the world having a sufficient number of adequately protected heavy tanks. The exploitation phase of a battle was seen as secondary and best carried out by controlled and methodical movement to ensure superiority in numbers, so that the heavy tank’s mobility was of secondary concern. Although the Char B1 had a reasonably good speed for the time of its conception, no serious efforts were made to improve it when much faster tanks appeared.
More important than the tank's limitations in tactical mobility, however, were its limitations in strategic mobility. The low practical range implied the need to refuel very often, limiting its operational capabilities. This again implied that the armoured divisions of the Infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées, were not very effective as a mobile reserve and thus lacked strategic flexibility. They were not created to fulfill such a role in the first place, which was reflected in the small size of the artillery and infantry components of the divisions.
Another explanation of the similarity to the British Mark I lies in the Char B1's original specification to create a self-propelled gun able to destroy enemy infantry and artillery. The main weapon of the tank was its 75 mm howitzer, and the entire design of the vehicle was directed to making this gun as effective as possible. When in the early 1930s it became obvious that the Char B1 also had to defeat counterattacking enemy armour, it was too late for a complete redesign. The solution was to add the standard cast APX-1 turret which also equipped the Char D2 and the Somua S35. Like most French tanks of the period the Char B thus had a small one-man turret. The commander not only had to command the tank, but also to aim and load the anti-tank gun, and if he was a unit leader, he had to command his other tanks as well. This was in contrast with the contemporary German, British and to a lesser extent Soviet policy to use two or three-man turret crews, in which these duties were divided amongst several men, or to use dedicated command vehicles.
Among the most powerfully armed and armoured tanks of its day, the Char B1 was very effective in direct confrontations with early German armour during the Battle of France. The 60 mm (2.36 in) frontal armor was sloped, giving it an effective strength of near 80 mm (3.15 in), and it proved to be almost invulnerable to the 1940 Panzer II and III as well as the early Panzer IV with its short 75mm close-support gun. There were no real weak spots, and this invulnerability helped the B1 to close on targets, then destroy them with the turret 47 mm (1.85 in) or the brute force of the howitzer HE shells. However, its slow speed and high fuel consumption made it ill-adapted to the war of movement then being fought.
In the meantime, plans had taken shape to improve the Char B1, and this led to two developments that eventually entered the hardware stage: A further up-armoured version, the Char B1 "ter", was designed with sloped and welded 70 mm armour, weighing 36.6 tonnes and powered by a 350 hp (260 kW) engine. It was meant to replace the B1 bis to accelerate mass production, a change first intended for the summer of 1940 but later postponed to March 1941 and finally abandoned.
In the course of the redesign, space was provided for a fifth crew member, a "mechanic". Cost was reduced by omitting the complex Neader transmission for aiming the howitzer and giving the hull gun a traverse of five degrees to each side instead. The first prototype was shown in 1937, but only three prototypes could be partly finished before the defeat of France. Serial production was rejected due to the need to build totally new production lines for the much-modified Char B1 ter, so that this development was a dead end, even more so because it did not really cure the vehicle’s weakness of the overburdened commander and the split armament.
The latter issues were addressed with another development, a modernized variant of the existing Char B1 bis with a new weapon layout, the Char B1 “tetre”. Work on this variant started in 1936, as an alternative concept to the one-man turret and as an experimental carrier for a new high velocity semi-automatic 75 mm multi-purpose gun with a long barrel. Such a weapon was direly needed, because the biggest caliber of an anti-tank gun was a mere 47 mm, the SA 35 gun. The only recent alternative was the infantry’s 47 mm APX anti-tank gun from 1937, which could pierce 60 mm (2.4 in) at 550 meters (600 yd) or 80 mm (3.1 in) at 180 meters (200 yd), but it had not been adapted to vehicle use yet and was not regarded to be powerful enough to cope with tanks like the Char B1 itself.
This new 75 mm tank gun was already under development at the Atelier de Construction de Rueil (ARL) for a new medium 20-ton-tank, the Char G1 from Renault, that was to replace the Char B1. The gun, called “ARL 37”, would be mounted in a new three-man turret, and ARL was developing prototypes of both a turret that could be taken by the Char B1’s and S35’s limited turret ring, as well as the gun itself, which was based on the 75 mm high velocity gun with hydro-pneumatic recoil compensation from the vintage heavy FCM 2C tank
The ARL 37 had a mass of 750 kg (1,653.5 lb) and a barrel length of 3,281 mm (129.2 in) with a bore of 43 calibers. Maximum muzzle velocity was 740 m/s (2,400 ft/s). The gun was fitted with an electric firing mechanism and the breech operated semi-automatically. Only one-piece ammunition was used, and both HE and AP rounds could be fired – even though the latter had to developed, too, because no such round was available in 1937/38 yet. However, with early experimental Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap (APCBC) rounds, the ARL 37 was able to penetrate 133 mm (5.2 in) of vertical steel plate at 100 m range, 107 mm (4.2 in) at 1.000 m and still 85 mm (3.3 in) at 2.000 m, making it a powerful anti-tank weapon of its era.
Since the new weapon was expected to fire both HE and AP rounds, the Char B1’s howitzer in the hull was omitted, its opening faired over and instead a movable 7.5 mm Reibel machine gun was added in a ball mount, operated by a radio operator who sat next to the driver. Another 7.5mm machine gun was mounted co-axially to the main gun in the turret, which had a cupola and offered space for the rest of the crew: a dedicated commander as well as a gunner and loader team.
The hexagonal turret was cast and had a welded roof as well as a gun mantlet. With its 70 mm frontal armor as well as the tank’s new hull front section, the conversions added a total of four net tons of weight, so that the Char B1 tetre weighed 36 tons. To prevent its performance from deteriorating further, it received the Char B1 ter’s uprated 350 hp (260 kW) engine. The running gear remained unchanged, even though the fully rotating turret made the complex and expensive Neader transmission superfluous, so that it was replaced by a standard heavy-duty piece.
Although promising, the Char B1 tetre’s development was slow, delayed by the lack of resources and many teething troubles with the new 75 mm cannon and the turret. When the war broke out in September 1939, production was cleared and began slowly, but focus remained on existing vehicles and weapons. By the time there were perhaps 180 operational B1 and B1 bis in all. They were used for the Sarre offensive, a short-lived burst without serious opposition, with a massive force of 41 divisions and 2.400 tanks. The Char B1 served with the armoured divisions of the infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées (DCr). The First and Second DCR had 69 Char B1s each, the Third 68. These were highly specialized offensive units, to break through fortified positions. The mobile phase of a battle was to be carried out by the Divisions Légères Mécaniques (mechanised light divisions) of the cavalry, equipped with the SOMUA S35.
After the German invasion several ad hoc units were formed: the 4e DCr with 52 Char B1s and five autonomous companies (347e, 348e, 349e, 352e and 353e Compagnie Autonome de Chars) with in total 56 tanks: 12 B1s and 44 B1 bis; 28e BCC was reconstituted with 34 tanks. By that time, a very limited number of Char B1 tetre had been produced and delivered to operational units, but their tactical value was low since sufficient 75 mm AP rounds were not available – the tanks had to use primarily the same HE rounds that were fired with the Char B1’s howitzer, and these posed only a limited threat to German tanks, esp. the upgraded Panzer III and IVs. The Char B1 tertre’s potential was never fully exploited, even though most of the tanks were used as command vehicles.
The regular French divisions destroyed quite a few German tanks but lacked enough organic infantry and artillery to function as an effective mobile reserve. After the defeat of France, captured Char B1 of all variants would be used by Germany, with some rebuilt as flamethrowers, Munitionspanzer, or mechanized artillery.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (driver, radio operator/machine gunner, commander, gunner, loader)
Weight: 36 tonnes (40 short tons, 35 long tons)
Length: 6.98 m (22 ft 10½ in) overall with gun forward
6.37 m (20 ft 11 in) hull only
Width: 2.46 m (8 ft 1 in)
Height: 2.84 m (9 ft 3¾ in)
Ground clearance: 40 cm (1 ft 3¾ in)
Climbing: 93 cm (3 ft ½ in)
Trench crossing: 2,4 m (7 ft 10½ in)
Suspension: Bogies with a mixture of vertical coil and leaf springs
Steering: Double differential
Fuel capacity: 400 liters
Armour:
14 to 70 mm (0.55 to 2.75 in)
Performance:
28 km/h (17 mph) on road
21 km/h (13 mph) off-road
Operational range: 200 km (124 mi) on road
Power/weight: 9.7 hp/ton
Engine:
1× Renault inline 6 cylinder 16.5 litre petrol engine with 350 hp (260 kW)
Transmission:
5 forward and 1 rear gear
Armament:
1x 75 ARL 37 high-velocity cannon with 94 rounds
2x 7.5 mm (0.295 in) Reibel machine guns with a total of 5,250 rounds
The kit and its assembly:.
This fictional Char B1 variant was based on the question what the tank could have looked like if there had been a suitable 75 mm gun available that could replace both its howitzer in the hull and the rather light anti-tank gun in the turret? No such weapon existed in France, but I tried to extrapolate the concept based on the standard Char B1 hull.
Two big changes were made: the first concerned the hull howitzer, which was deleted, and its recessed opening faired over with 1 mm styrene sheet and putty. This sound easier as it turned out to be because the suspension for the front right idler wheel had to be retained, and the complex shape of the glacis plate and the opening called for patchwork. A fairing for the co-driver was added as well as a ball mount for the new hull machine gun. New shackles were added to the lower front and, finally, new rows of bolt heads (created with white glue).
The turret was completely replaced with a cast turret from a 1943 T-34/76 (Zvezda kit). While its shape and gun mantlet are quite characteristic, I still used it mostly OOB because its size and shape turned out to be a very good match to contemporary French tank turrets. However, the gun barrel was moved and a fairing for a hydro-pneumatic recoil damper was added, as well as a French commander cupola. And an adapter had to be scratched to attach the new turret to the hull, together with small fairings for the wider turret ring.
Painting and markings:
I wanted a rather unusual paint scheme for this Char B1 derivative, and found inspiration in an operational museum tank that depicts vehicle “311/Rhin”: it carries a three-tone livery in two greens and brown, instead of the more common sand, dark green and earth brown tones or just two-tone schemes.
The colors were adapted to an irregular pattern, and the paints I used were Humbrol 120 (FS 34227, a rather pale interpretation of the tone), 10 (Gloss Dark Brown) and ModelMaster 1764 (FS 34092). As a personal twist, the colors were edged in black, enhancing the contrast.
The markings were puzzled together from various sources in an attempt to create suitable tactical codes of the early 1940 era. The “Ace of Spades” emblem on the turret is, for example, are a marking of the 1st section. The dot in front of the “K” probably indicated a command vehicle, but I am not certain.
Some post-shading was done as well as dry-brushing with light earth brown to emphasize edges and details. Then the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and received some dusting with grey-brown artist pigments, simulating dust around the running gear.
Well, not too much was changed, but the new, bigger turret changes the Char B1’s look considerably – it looks somewhat smaller now? Its new silhouette also reminds me of a duck? Weird, but the conversion worked out well – esp. the modified glacis plate without the howitzer’s recessed opening looks very natural.
Hormonal sentience, first described by Robert A. Freitas Jr., describes the information processing rate in plants, which are mostly based on hormones instead of neurons like in all major animals (except sponges). Plants can to some degree communicate with each other and there are even examples of one-way-communication with animals.
Acacia trees produce tannin to defend themselves when they are grazed upon by animals. The airborne scent of the tannin is picked up by other acacia trees, which then start to produce tannin themselves as a protection from the nearby animals. When attacked by caterpillars, some plants can release chemical signals to attract parasitic wasps that attack the caterpillars.
A similar phenomenon can be found not only between plants and animals, but also between fungus and animals. There exists some sort of communication between a fungus garden and workers of the leaf-cutting ant Atta sexdens rubropilosa. If the garden is fed with plants that are poisonous for the fungus, it signals this to the ants, which then will avoid fertilizing the fungus garden with any more of the poisonous plant.The Venus flytrap, during a 1- to 20-second sensitivity interval, counts two stimuli before snapping shut on its insect prey, a processing peak of 1 bit/s. Mass is 10-100 grams, so the flytrap's SQ is about +1. Plants generally take hours to respond to stimuli though, so vegetative SQs (Sentience Quotient) tend to cluster around -2.In theory even an organism with a hormonal system instead of a nervous system could be intelligent in some degree, but it would be an extremely slow brain, to say the least.And yet, at least higher plants are able to produce electrical signals, even if they do not use them in the same way animals do. František Baluška from the University of Bonn in Germany is one of the authorities on plant neurobiology.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormonal_sentience
Plants do not have a brain or neuronal network, but reactions within signalling pathways may provide a biochemical basis for learning and memory in addition to computation and problem solving.Controversially, the brain is used as a metaphor in plant intelligence to provide an integrated view of signalling.Plants respond to environmental stimuli by movement and changes in morphology. They communicate while actively competing for resources. In addition, plants accurately compute their circumstances, use sophisticated cost–benefit analysis and take tightly controlled actions to mitigate and control diverse environmental stressors. Plants are also capable of discriminating positive and negative experiences and of "learning" (registering memories) from their past experiences. Plants use this information to update their behaviour in order to survive present and future challenges of their environment.Plant physiology studies the role of signalling, communication, and behaviour to integrate data obtained at the genetic, molecular, biochemical, and cellular levels with the physiology, development, and behaviour of individual organisms, plant ecosystems, and evolution. The neurobiological view sees plants as information-processing organisms with rather complex processes of communication occurring throughout the individual plant organism. It studies how environmental information is gathered, processed, integrated and shared (sensory plant biology) to enable these adaptive and coordinated responses (plant behaviour); and how sensory perceptions and behavioural events are 'remembered' in order to allow predictions of future activities upon the basis of past experiences. Plants, it is claimed by some plant physiologists, are as sophisticated in behaviour as animals but this sophistication has been masked by the time scales of plants' response to stimuli, many orders of magnitude slower than animals'.It has been argued that although plants are capable of adaptation, it should not be called intelligence, as plant neurobiologists are relying primarily on metaphors and analogies to argue that complex responses in plants can only be produced by intelligence.[32]"A bacterium can monitor its environment and instigate developmental processes appropriate to the prevailing circumstances, but is that intelligence? Such simple adaptation behaviour might be bacterial intelligence but is clearly not animal intelligence." However, plant intelligence fits a definition of intelligence proposed by David Stenhouse in a book about evolution and animal intelligence where he described it as "adaptively variable behaviour during the lifetime of the individual".Critics of the concept have also argued that a plant cannot have goals once it is past the development stage of plantlet because, as a modular organism, each module seeks its own survival goals and the resultant whole organism behavior is not centrally controlled.[33] This view, however, necessarily accommodates the possibility that a tree is a collection of individually intelligent modules cooperating with, competing with and influencing each other, thus determining organism level behavior from the base up. The development into a larger organism whose modules must deal with different environmental conditions and challenges is not universal across plant species either, as smaller organisms might be subject to the same conditions across their bodies, at least, when the below and above ground parts are considered separately. Moreover, the claim that central control of development is completely absent from plants is readily falsified by apical dominance.Charles Darwin studied the movement of plants and in 1880 published a book The Power of Movement in Plants. In the book he concludes:It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the tip of the radicle thus endowed [..] acts like the brain of one of the lower animals; the brain being situated within the anterior end of the body, receiving impressions from the sense-organs, and directing the several movements.In philosophy, there are few studies of the implications of plant perception. Michael Marder put forth a phenomenology of plant life based on the physiology of plant perception.Paco Calvo Garzon offers a philosophical take on plant perception based on the cognitive sciences and the computational modeling of consciousness.Comparison to neurobiology:.A plant's sensory and response system has been compared to the neurobiological processes of animals. Plant neurobiology, an unfamiliar misnomer, concerns mostly the sensory adaptive behaviour of plants and plant electrophysiology. Indian scientist J. C. Bose is credited as the first person to research and talk about neurobiology of plants. Many plant scientists and neuroscientists, however, view this as inaccurate, because plants do not have neurons.The ideas behind plant neurobiology were criticised in a 2007 article published in Trends in Plant Science by Amedeo Alpi and other scientists, including such eminent plant biologists as Gerd Jürgens, Ben Scheres, and Chris Sommerville. The breadth of fields of plant science represented by these researchers reflects the fact that the vast majority of the plant science research community reject plant neurobiology. Their main arguments are that:"Plant neurobiology does not add to our understanding of plant physiology, plant cell biology or signaling".
"There is no evidence for structures such as neurons, synapses or a brain in plants".The common occurrence of plasmodesmata in plants which "poses a problem for signaling from an electrophysiological point of view" since extensive electrical coupling would preclude the need for any cell-to-cell transport of a ‘neurotransmitter-like’ compounds.The authors call for an end to "superficial analogies and questionable extrapolations" if the concept of "plant neurobiology" is to benefit the research community.There were several responses to the criticism clarifying that the term "plant neurobiology" is a metaphor and metaphors have proved useful on several previous occasions.[37][38] Plant ecophysiology describes this phenomenon.Parallels in other taxa. As described above in the case of a plant, similar mechanisms exist in a bacterial cell, a choanoflagellate, a fungal hypha, or a sponge, among the many other examples. All of these individual organisms of the respective taxa, despite being devoid of a brain or nervous system, are capable of sensing their immediate and momentary environment and responding accordingly. In the case of single-celled life, the sensory pathways are even more primitive in the sense that they take place on the surface of a single cell, as opposed to a network of many cells.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_perception_(physiology)
Recent surprising similarities between plant cells and neuronsPlant cells and neurons share several similarities, including non-centrosomal microtubules, motile post-Golgi organelles, separated both spatially/structurally and functionally from the Golgi apparatus and involved in vesicular endocytic recycling, as well as cell-cell adhesion domains based on the actin/myosin cytoskeleton which serve for cell-cell communication. Tip-growing plant cells such as root hairs and pollen tubes also resemble neurons extending their axons. Recently, surprising discoveries have been made with respect to the molecular basis of neurodegenerative disorders known as Hereditary Spastic Paraplegias and tip-growth of root hairs. All these advances are briefly discussed in the context of other similarities between plant cells and neurons.There are very prominent similarities between tip-growing plant cells and the extending axons of neurons. However, recent advances reveal that these visible similarities stretch beyond the tip-growing plant cells and include plant tissue cells generating action potentials3 and accomplishing vesicle trafficking and recycling, typically at actin/myosin enriched cell-cell adhesion domains resembling neuronal synapses. Moreover, plant cells and neurons are similar from the cellular perspective, when most of their microtubules and Golgi apparatus organelles are not associated with the perinuclear centrosomes.In plant cells, Golgi stacks and Trans-Golgi Networks (TGNs) are motile organelles extending through the whole plant cells. Similarly in neurons centrosome-independent cortical microtubules are abundant in axons. They transport, among other cargo, so-called Golgi Outposts—which correspond to the TGNs of plant cells toward neuronal synapses. In both plant cells and neurons, TGNs act as independent organelles separated both spatially/structurally and functionally from the Golgi apparatus.Intriguingly, similarly as in neurons, also the TGN of plant cells is the inherent part of the endosomal/vesicular recycling pathways, supporting the dynamic and communicative nature of plant synapses.Plant action potentials (electric spikes) run in an axial direction, along the longitudinal axis of any plant organ, and the highest spike activity was scored in the transition zone of the root apex in maize.Hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP) represents a heterogeneous group of genetic neurodegenerative disorders affecting the longest neurons of the human body, extending from the brain along the spinal cord /down to the legs.21 In the HSP disorders, axons of these long neurons degenerate causing problems in controlling leg muscles. One of the major genes in which mutation results in the HSP is Atlastin. Recent study has reported that Atlastin is homologous to the RHD3 protein of Arabidopsis.RHD3 protein is essential for proper growth and development of root hairs in Arabidopsis.Moreover, RHD3 is also important for the proper arrangement of root cell files which underlies the direction of root growth.In order to maintain their ordered cell files, root apex cross-walls (plant root synapses) perform active vesicle recycling. Both Arabidopsis RHD3 and Drosophila Atlastin are important for shaping tubular ER networks.RHD3 is also known to be required for the proper arrangement of the actin cytoskeleton and cell wall maintenance via vesicle trafficking.Moreover, similarly as Atlastin in neurons,RHD3 is important for the GA morphogenesis in plant cells too Importantly, both RHD3 and Atlastin are implicated in membrane tubulation and vesiculation whereas rhd3 mutant line emerges to be less active in endocytic internalization of FM endocytic tracer.Drosophila Atlastin regulates the stability of muscle microtubules and is required for both the axonal maintenance and synapse development. All this suggest that Arabidopsis emerges as an attractive and useful model object for investigations of mechanisms underlying HSP disorders in humans.Glutamate is one of the best understood and the most widespread excitatory .neurotransmitter which is perceived via glutamate receptors at brain synapses in animals and humans. These neuronal receptors have, in fact, deep evolutionary origin in prokaryotic bacteria, and are present also in plants., Importantly, the plant glutamate receptors have all the features of neuronal ones, and glutamate induces plant action potentials., All this strongly suggest that glutamate serves in neurotransmitter-like cell-cell communication in plants too. Interestingly in this respect, especially the root apices are target of the neuronal-like activity of glutamate in plants, with effects on cell development, root growth, morphogenesis, and behavior. The transition zone cells, localized between the apical meristem and basal cell elongation zone, respond to glutamate with rapid depolarization of the plasma membrane and this response is blocked by a specific antagonist of ionotropic glutamate receptors, 2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate.Cells of the transition zone, also known as the distal elongation zone or the basal meristem, are crucial for root primordia priming,and exogenous glutamate is known to decrease primary root growth and increase lateral root proliferation.Beta-N-methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA) is a neurotoxic amino acid, derived from cycads, which is well-known to act as agonists and antagonists of mammalian glutamate receptors. BMAA inhibits root growth, cotyledon opening, and it stimulates elongation of light-grown hypocotyls in Arabidopsis.BMAA affects growth of Arabidopsis organs at very low concentrations, and these BMAA-induced effects are reversed by the addition of glutamate.This is consistent with a scenario wherein BMAA acts to block plant-specific glutamate receptors.Similarly to glutamate, aluminium also induces very rapid plasma membrane depolarization specifically in cells of the root apex transition zone. Moreover, glutamate and aluminium both induce rapid and strong calcium spikes with unique signatures in cells of the transition zone.These root cells represent the primary target for the aluminium toxicity in plants, whereas aluminium is not toxic to root cells which have already entered the rapid elongation region.Similarly, although aluminium is not so toxic in most plant cells, neuronal-like tip-growing root hairs and pollen tubes1,2 are sensitive to aluminium similarly as are the transition zone cells. In these latter cells, aluminium is specifically internalized via endocytosis. Internalized endocytic aluminium interferes with vesicle trafficking/recycling and endocytosis, inhibiting the PIN2-driven basipetal auxin transport in the transition zone of root apices.Aluminium targets specifically the auxinsecreting plant synapses and affects the polar auxin-transport-based root cell patterning. Moreover, aluminium affects also nitric oxide (NO) production which is highest in cells of the the distal portion of the transition zone. Importantly, the rapidly elongating root cells are not sensitive towards aluminium and neither is there internalization of aluminium into rapidly elongating root cells. In support of the endocytosis of aluminium being the primary process linked to the aluminium toxicity in root cells, endocytosis of aluminium and its toxicity is lowered in the Arabidopsis mutant over-expressing the DnaJ domain protein auxillin which regulates the clathrin-based endocytosis.In animals and humans, neuronal cells are extremely sensitive towards aluminium which is internalized via endocytosis specifically in these cells. Aluminium was found to be enriched in lysosomes, similarly like Alzheimer’s amyloid β-peptide plaque depositions. These are also internalized from cell surface and aluminium was reported to inhibit their degradation.In conclusion, in both transition zone root cells and neurons, endocytosis of aluminium emerges as relevant to its high biotoxicity. In plants, the aluminium toxicity is the most important limiting factor for crop production in acid soil environments worldwide. Further studies on these cells might give us crucial clues not only for plant biology and agriculture but also for our still limited understanding of the Alzheimer disease. In line with the original proposal of Charles and Francis Darwin, root apices of plants represent neuronal/anterior pole of plant bodies
The MM theme for Monday is wallet and can include change purses and I’m extrapolating to a billfold. My cool crossbody bag has zippered compartments so I don’t carry a wallet per se. If I need to take money to the bank to deposit, I put it in one of these transparent zippered pockets and fold it over so it fits. I can show you the places where my cards go in my bag but it’s really rather uninteresting.
The “Quad” in the Jefferys and Nash Quad tells exactly what it was: a four wheel drive vehicle, one of the first successful ones ever to be made. There were other four wheel drive vehicles made at the time, but none enjoyed the reputation or success of the Jefferys Quad.
The company responsible for the Quad was built, from the ground up, by Thomas Jeffery. Jeffery, an innovative tinkerer and inventor, had emigrated from Great Britain at the age of 17, in 1862. He always had things to do to earn a living, using his mind and his hands.
Thomas Jeffery and Rambler
Jeffery settled in Chicago, where he built several models of high quality and fairly priced telescopes. As his fortunes increased, he cast about for other things to do and make. He found one well paid enterprise in construction of models for inventions through the Unites States Patent Office. He was able to see what lay ahead for possible new enterprises for industrial things.
One such exercise allowed him to meet a future business partner. Jeffery had already put together a new bicycle with a vastly strengthened frame, using a far less expensive manufacturing method, through the use of flared tubing, brazed together on a production line. The partner offered to put up the initial money to get the company started; Jeffery quickly agreed, though he had enough money of his own to do so, allowing him to save his own capital. Together, the two men set up and built the Rambler, a totally new concept in bicycles. Sales took off.
Part of the reason for the high success rate was their interaction with John North Willys, a young innovative sales person in Canandaigua New York. Bicycles suddenly became the rage in America, and Rambler, thanks to Jeffery and Willys, became the number two seller very quickly.
In 1882, Jeffery invented the “clincher” tire, quickly selling patent rights to Dunlop. It was made from garden hose, but had wires on the edges to allow the tire to “clinch” to the bicycle rim, keeping them from rolling under and pulling off. Dunlap called it the “pneumatic tire.” It gave a far better ride and handling than the hard rubber types used up to then. It was thought, although not ever known, that Willys had a role in its development, but no documentation has ever established this. Presumably, Willys sold a lot of Dunlop bicycle tires when he acquired Overland in 1907. It became the basis for all modern day tires, to this day, with Chrysler taking it to new heights in the 1940s with its “safety rim” wheels.
The profitability of the Rambler Bicycle Company is unknown, but Willys sold enough of them to earn a cool million dollars each year, in his early years with the bicycle! We can extrapolate that it made plenty of money for Jeffery.
Jeffery encountered his first automobile concept in 1895. He tinkered around, and by 1897, had built his first Rambler automobile. He chose the name because of the reputation established by the bicycle. He could not produce it in the bicycle factory due to space limitations; and his partner did not want it there. Jeffery then sold his share out to his partner, using some of the proceeds to buy the empty plant where Sterling bicycles had been made, in Kenosha, Wisconsin. He and his son Charles built more experimental models, the A and B, in 1901; both used a steering wheel instead of the then-standard tiller, as Columbia had recently done, though the C, which went into production, used the tiller.
Jeffery took some time to manufacture automobiles, adopting a production line system, the second to do so. (Henry Ford was hardly first in production line technique; he just took it to usury proportions for thousands of workers!) Ransom Olds had, with Oldsmobile, been the first car manufacturer to install a production line.
By 1902, Jeffery's facility was on line and producing cars. It took awhile for advertising to catch up, but for the full year 1902, 1,500 Model B and C cars were built. Not quite a profit, but enough that Jeffery was more convinced than ever he was on the right track.
Jeffery continued to innovate, changing the prerequisite steering tiller to the easier and more controllable steering wheel (Columbia had done the same shortly before). He also included, at no charge, a spare wheel, mounted tire, and jack and wrenches to enable the changing of a flat tire on the road. The cars quickly gained a solid, dependable reputation, with low maintenance costs, and high resale values.
Not one to go at things until they were established, Jeffery did not begin earnest auto production until 1902. By then, the car, the facility, the lines, advertising, and parts were all established. As well, the first dealership, under John North Willys, was operating in Canandaigua New York. Willys sold 2 Ramblers that first year, then 8 the next, and 20 the next. Arranging financing was the key, and Willys found out how to get banks to agree.
Thomas Jeffery passed away in 1910 at the age of just 65. His son inherited the company, changing its name to Jeffery to honor his father. He did not have his father's driving spirit, but he invented conventional (two wheel) drive trucks and they were introduced in 1910, and quickly established as solid a reputation as the cars. Profits were excellent, and the future appeared bright.
Development of the Jeffery Quad
Before World War I, the US Army had been diligently searching for a vehicle to replace their mule teams. A sort of “go anywhere”, 24 hour job that would outclass the mules, which were becoming difficult to obtain, maintain, and provide adequate care for.
In early 1913, the Army came calling on the Jeffery company. At that time, the military was not ideal customer; they were exceptionally slow in paying, and wishy-washy about their requirements. Even with this visit, they were not exactly certain of what might be able to replace mule teams. There were still many higher-up ranks that didn’t want anything but mules, even in the face of mechanization of the armed forces by other nations. The captains and the majors of the Army purchasing bureau had to tread lightly. However, one Army Officer and Mr. Jeffery hit it off. After the official visit, that officer came back to see Mr. Jeffery, and a vehicle was discussed that would not only meet requirements, but would be seen by the world as the vehicle to have in their military as well. Within a few days, the Jeffery Motor Company introduced the QUAD.
It was remarkably innovative, yet conventional as well. It was constructed on a 1.5 ton (3,000 lb) chassis. Power came through a Buda 312 cubic inch 4 cylinder gasoline fueled engine. Water was cooled by a full stand up radiator that rode on the extreme front of the chassis, ahead of the driver and passenger positions, which were not under a cab; they were like a mule wagon, wide open. The engine drove a constant-mesh 4-speed transmission, connected to the drives by propeller shafts to automatic locking differentials. They were centrally located on the upper face of substantial I-beam axles. Half shafts then delivered the drive, by universal joints, mounted directly above the steering kingpins, to a pinion.
The steering was four wheeled, not unlike the modern Torsen differentials used today, with an internal tooth ring gear in each of the four wheels. This kept the differentials up high and out of the way of items in the roadway, allowing for amazing road clearances.
Word spread quickly. In any trial, the Quad proved itself more than capable. Military people from around the world jumped to buy the new Quad. In 1913 alone, Jeffery sold 5,578 of them. Some customers wanted the truck built as a 4x2, and some were made this way, but only in 1913.
Production figures for 1914 were 3,096. In 1915, 7,600 Quads were sold.
The Nash Quad 4x4
In 1916, Jeffery sold the entire company to Charles Nash, who had just left General Motors’ presidency, due to repeated clashes with the smarmy William C. Durant; James T. Storrow, a financier with Lee Higginson & Company. The pair paid $5 million for the company, and immediately changed the name of the company from Jeffery to Nash. The Quad became the Nash Quad while the Jeffery car became the Nash Rambler. Nash and Storrow reportedly tried to get Walter P. Chrysler to run it, but Durant offered Chrysler a stunning $500,000 per year to stay with Buick; had Chrysler made the move, he would likely not have run across “the Three Musketeers” and ended up forming Chrysler. (It is possible he would have ended up with his name on a line of Nash cars.)
The 1916 list price for the Nash Quad, $2,850, was substantial when compared with a conventional 1.5 ton truck for $990. Even so, Nash sold 11,000 Quads in 1916. Nash did quite well, and Quad production continued for 15 years, a testament to the original design. Company books showed a total production of 41,674 Quads.
Finally, the artwork displayed before the art gallery on First Street just begged to be reinterpreted. Fort Myers, Florida.
Annalisa Sonzogni - drum scan by CastorScan
Kodak Portra
-----
CastorScan's philosophy is completely oriented to provide the highest scan and postproduction
quality on the globe.
We work with artists, photographers, agencies, laboratories etc. who demand a state-of-the-art quality at reasonable prices.
Our workflow is fully manual and extremely meticulous in any stage.
We developed exclusive workflows and profilation systems to obtain unparallel results from our scanners not achievable through semi-automatic and usual workflows.
-----
CastorScan uses the best scanners in circulation, Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II, the best and most advanced scanner ever made, Kodak-Creo IQSmart 3, a high-end flatbed scanner, and Imacon 848.
The image quality offered by our Dainippon Screen 8060 scanner is much higher than that achievable with the best flatbed scanners or filmscanners dedicated and superior to that of scanners so-called "virtual drum" (Imacon – Hasselblad,) and, of course, vastly superior to that amateur or prosumer obtained with scanners such as Epson V750 etc .
Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II exceeds in quality any other scanner, including Aztek Premier and ICG 380 (in the results, not just in the technical specifications).
8060's main features: 12000 dpi, Hi-Q Xenon lamp, 25 apertures, 2 micron
Aztek Premier's main features: 8000 dpi, halogen lamp, 18 apertures, 3 micron
ICG 380's main features: 12000 dpi, halogen lamp, 9 apertures, 4 micron
Some of the features that make the quality of our drum scanners better than any other existing scan system include:
The scans performed on a drum scanner are famous for their detail, depth and realism.
Scans are much cleaner and show fewer imperfections than scans obtained from CCD scanners, and thus save many hours of cleaning and spotting in postproduction.
Image acquisition by the drum scanner is optically similar to using a microscopic lens that scans the image point by point with extreme precision and without deformation or distortion of any kind, while other scanners use enlarger lenses (such as the Rodenstock-Linos Magnagon 75mm f8 used in the Hasselblad-Imacon scanners) and have transmission systems with rubber bands: this involves mild but effective micro-strain and micro-geometric image distortions and quality is not uniform between the center and edges.
Drum scanners are exempt from problems of flatness of the originals, since the same are mounted on a perfectly balanced transparent acrylic drum; on the contrary, the dedicated film scanners that scan slides or negatives in their plastic frames are subject to quite significant inaccuracies, as well as the Imacon-Hasselblad scanners, which have their own rubber and plastic holders: they do not guarantee the perfect flatness of the original and therefore a uniform definition between center and edge, especially with medium and large size originals, which instead are guaranteed by drum scanners.
Again, drum scanners allow scanning at high resolution over the entire surface of the cylinder, while for example the Hasselblad Imacon scans are limited to 3200 dpi in 120 format and 2000 dpi in 4x5" format (the resolution of nearly every CCD scanner in the market drops as the size of the original scanned is increased).
Drum scanners allow complete scanning of the whole negative, including the black-orange mask, perforations etc, while using many other scanners a certain percentage of the image is lost because it is covered by frames or holders.
Drum scanners use photomultiplier tubes to record the light signal, which are much more sensitive than CCDs and can record many more nuances and variations in contrast with a lower digital noise.
If you look at a monitor at 100% the detail in shadows and darker areas of a scan made with a CCD scanner, you will notice that the details are not recorded in a clear and clean way, and the colors are more opaque and less differentiated. Additionally the overall tones are much less rich and differentiated.
We would like to say a few words about an unscrupulous and deceitful use of technical specifications reported by many manufacturers of consumer and prosumer scanners; very often we read of scanners that promise cheap or relatively cheap “drum scanner” resolutions, 16 bits of color depth, extremely high DMAX: we would like to say that these “nominal” resolutions do not correspond to an actual optical resolution, so that even in low-resolution scanning you can see an enormous gap between drum scanners and these scanners in terms of detail, as well as in terms of DMAX, color range, realism, “quality” of grain. So very often when using these consumer-prosumer scanners at high resolutions, it is normal to get a disproportionate increase of file size in MB but not an increase of detail and quality.
To give a concrete example: a drum scan of a 24x36mm color negative film at 3500 dpi is much more defined than a scan made with mostly CCD scanner at 8000 dpi and a drum scan at 2500 dpi is dramatically clearer than a scan at 2500 dpi provided by a CCD scanner. So be aware and careful with incorrect advertisement.
Scans can be performed either dry or liquid-mounted. The wet mounting further improves cleanliness (helps to hide dirt, scratches and blemishes) and plasticity of the image without compromising the original, and in addition by mounting with liquid the film grain is greatly reduced and it looks much softer and more pleasant than the usual "harsh" grain resulting from dry scans.
We use Kami SMF 2001 liquid to mount the transparencies and Kami RC 2001 for cleaning the same. Kami SMF 2001 evaporates without leaving traces, unlike the traditional oil scans, ensuring maximum protection for your film. Out of ignorance some people prefer to avoid liquid scanning because they fear that their films will be dirty or damaged: this argument may be plausible only in reference to scans made using mineral oils, which have nothing to do with the specific professional products we use.
We strongly reiterate that your original is in no way compromised by our scanning liquid and will return as you have shipped it, if not cleaner.
With respect to scanning from slides:
Our scanners are carefully calibrated with the finest IT8 calibration targets in circulation and with special customized targets in order to ensure that each scan faithfully reproduces the original color richness even in the most subtle nuances, opening and maintaining detail in shadows and highlights. These color profiles allow our scanners to realize their full potential, so we guarantee our customers that even from a chromatic point of view our scans are noticeably better than similar scans made by mostly other scan services in the market.
In addition, we remind you that our 8060 drum scanner is able to read the deepest shadows of slides without digital noise and with much more detail than CCD scanners; also, the color range and color realism are far better.
With respect to scanning from color and bw negatives: we want to emphasize the superiority of our drum scans not only in scanning slides, but also in color and bw negative scanning (because of the orange mask and of very low contrast is extremely difficult for any ccd scanner to read the very slight tonal and contrast nuances in the color negative, while a perfectly profiled 8060 drum scanner – also through the analog gain/white calibration - can give back much more realistic images and true colors, sharper and more three-dimensional).
In spite of what many claim, a meticulous color profiling is essential not only for scanning slides, but also, and even more, for color negatives. Without it the scan of a color negative will produce chromatic errors rather significant, thus affecting the tonal balance and then the naturalness-pleasantness of the images.
More unique than rare, we do not use standardized profiles provided by the software to invert each specific negative film, because they do not take into account parameters and variables such as the type of development, the level of exposure, the type of light etc.,; at the same time we also avoid systems of "artificial intelligence" or other functions provided by semi-automatic scanning softwares, but instead we carry out the inversion in a full manual workflow for each individual picture.
In addition, scanning with Imacon-Hasselblad scanners we do not use their proprietary software - Flexcolor – to make color management and color inversion because we strongly believe that our alternative workflow provides much better results, and we are able to prove it with absolute clarity.
At each stage of the process we take care of meticulously adjusting the scanning parameters to the characteristics of the originals, to extrapolate the whole range of information possible from any image without "burning" or reductions in the tonal range, and strictly according to our customer's need and taste.
By default, we do not apply unsharp mask (USM) in our scans, except on request.
To scan reflective originals we follow the same guidelines and guarantee the same quality standard.
We guarantee the utmost thoroughness and expertise in the work of scanning and handling of the originals and we provide scans up to 12,000 dpi of resolution, at 16-bit, in RGB, GRAYSCALE, LAB or CMYK color mode; unless otherwise indicated, files are saved with Adobe RGB 1998 or ProPhoto RGB color profile.
A symphony of wind.
Trees clap their hands!
Applause of leaves falls.
by Kathie Luther
That is a Haiku I wrote that goes with this early 1988 oil painting I did when I was just learning to paint. A haiku is a poem of 17 syllables, 3 lines,5-7-5. It juxtaposes unrelated observations in order to glimpse hidden connections between things. Mood, suggestion, refers to a season many times.
"Haiku are concise nature poems, a combination of brevity, technical discipline and expressive content. An analogy can be drawn to Chinese drawings, where a vast landscape may be evoked with a few brush strokes. The best haiku are subtle, indirect, but with a piercing clarity."
"A haiku does not (contrary to what your teacher may have said) have to contain 17 syllables. It should be brief. As few as 4 syllables. Should be of three lines in the english language tradition, but doesn't have to be. Adherence to other traditional "rules" of haiku such as cutting words, seasonal themes, concrete imagery, natural subjects, and ambiguous or layered meanings is appreciated but not necessary. Humorous Haiku are called Senryu and will be considered acceptable as long as they are created in a spirit of playfulness ."
"Try to convey the imagery in the first line, expanded, extrapolated description in the second and a feeling association in the 3rd."
www.ahapoetry.com/haiku.htm for examples and more instruction.
Haiku challenge: write one of your own and post it here!
PS. Did you notice the two ducks in the painting?
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the fully functional VF-1 prototype (the VF-X-1).
Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be produced en masse within a short period of time, a total of 5,459 airframes were delivered until 2013. 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. From the start the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable and versatile 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 and upgrades. The VF-1 was a single-seater, but the VF-1D was a two-seater with a slightly extended cockpit section, originally developed as a trainer for conversion duties. It shared almost all systems of the single-seaters, though, was fully combat-capable, and only differed through an extended cockpit section that offered space for a second seat behind the standard pilot seat.
The VF-1 was operated by many operational U.N. Spacy units - initially by fighter/interceptor units, but when more and more aircraft became available or early production models were replaced by new and improved later machines, VF-1s were also operated by strike units like the "Manjisai". This unit was formed in early 2009 to defend the southern regions of the Japanese mainland from Zentraedi attacks. Its home base became Naha, and in honor of the Japanese air force unit that had been based in the Okinawa region during WWII to defend the country against american bomber raids, the unit adopted the "144" (which later became the more famous IJA 244th Hikotai) number and carried the old unit marking on the VF-1s' fins. SVA-144 machines were furthermore noteworthy for their experimental paint schemes, which were tested to replace the U.N. Spacy's standard livery of sand and white for the VF-1As. Several color combinations were tested, including pale blue and teal hues, and some flight commanders decorated their machines further with colorful trim and cheatlines to add an individual touch - a feature that was normally reserved to commanding officers.
After the end of Space War I, production on Earth was stopped but the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and its persistent production after the war in many space sectors 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. 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 several major variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30), sub-variants (VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68) and upgrades of existing airframes (like the VF-1P).
Despite its relatively short and intense production run the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness even years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!
General characteristics:
All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,
used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force and U.N.S. Marine Corps
Accommodation:
Pilot and trainee in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seats
Dimensions:
Fighter Mode:
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)
Height 3.84 meters
Battroid Mode:
Height 12.68 meters
Width 7.3 meters
Length 4.0 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons
MTOW: 37.0 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or 225.63 kN in overboost
4x 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)
18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles
Performance:
Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h
Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87
g limit: in space +7
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Design Features:
3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system
Transformation:
Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.
Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.
Armament:
2x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 ppm
1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm
4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including…
12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or
12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or
6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or
4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,
or a combination of above load-outs
The kit and its assembly:
Once again, a vintage 1:100 VF-1 model, no idea how many I have built of these - probably more than 30... But I still find inspriration for canonical, fictional and even converted/fictional variants. This project was spontaneously inspired by a photograph of a car that I had recently come upon while browsing the WWW: an individualized McLaren, taken somewhere in the Persian Gulf region. I just had a front view, though, but it showed that the car had been re-painted or foil-wrapped in two teal colors, with thin yellow contrast lines between these tones. Sounds horrible, but actually worked for me, also because of the color contrasts. I
The kit was built OOB, with the landing gear down and with an open canopy. As a standard upgrade I added some typical small blade antennae on the nose and on the spine. As an extra I provided this VF-1 with radar warning antenna fairlings at the top of the fins, too. The four underwing hardpoints were retained, but the armament was changed from twelve original AMM-1 missiles to four cluster bomb units on the outer pair of pylons (these are actually 1:100 scale, from a toylike Revell A-10 snap-fit kit) and two fictional GBUs on the inner stations - modified (poor) Kh-23/AS-7 "Kerry" ASMs in 1:72 from a Kangam/Revell Yak-38 kit. Furthermore, the VF-1's standard GU-11 gun pod was retained, modified to hold a scratched wire display for in-flight pictures.
Painting and markings:
Quite challenging, and to ease things I jused an Arii VF-1J kit molded in pale green plastic. The cockpit became canonical medium grey with brown seat cushions, air intakes and some other areas were painted in a dark grey tone. The two teal tones were a bit challenging, though, and the scheme itself evolved gradually, because I adapted the inspiring car's front section with a darker shade in front of the windscreen and along the lower front bumper, and extrapolated it further back on the VF-1.
The light tone would be the primary color, with darker accents and thin yellow stripes/lines differentiating them. This led early to dark "shank flanks" and an extended spine, as well as dark folded arms and a dark head unit underneath. However, wings, fins and dorsal area were challenging, and I actually made some design tests with computer aid to eventually come up with "breast chevrons", and extended spine and simple dark slats and flaps on the wings - instead of dark teal wings with a single lighter stripe, what I had initially favored. But it would not have worked and disrupted the overall elegant look.
The dark teal turquoise is ModelMaster's "Soviet Cockpit Teal", while the light tone is Humbrol 65 (RLM 65, Lichtblau), later panel-shaded with ModelColor's acrylic 70.832 "Patina Verdin", a markedly lighter and more greenish tone, which was applied with a glazing technique. Together it works quite well. The yellow lines were all created with 0.5mm decal stripes from TL Modellbau - a tedious job, because the stripes had partly to be carefully bent into shape, but much easier than trying to do this stunt with paint. And the result is a rather subtle yet decorative livery, almost a low-viz livery, thanks to the subdued teal tones and the thin yellow lines which differ only a little in brightness from their surroundings.
The decals came mostly from the OOB sheet, just the "kite" roundels and the yellow "U.N. Spacy" tags on legs and gun pod were procured from a VF-1A sheet. The "ER" code comes from an Academy OV-10 Bronco while the yellow 244th Hikotai emblem on the outer fins' surface came from a Printscale aftermarket sheet. After the decals had been completed the model was sealed with a coat of not-100%-matt acrylic varnish. Position and other lights were painted with translucent acrylic paint on chrome silver vases, and the model was finally completed.
A pretty VF-1, and it looks (to me) better than expected, despite the strange color combination of teal and yellow. It appears to be quite effective, too, since the teal tones are rather subdued and only the kite roundels really stand out. It even looks elegant, even though the livery is totally fictional?!
+++ 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 Char B1 was a French heavy tank manufactured before World War II. It was conceived as a specialized offensive vehicle, armed with a 75 mm howitzer in the hull. Later a 47 mm gun in a turret was added, to allow it to function also as a Char de Bataille, a ‘battle tank’ fighting enemy armour, equipping the armoured divisions of the Infantry Arm. Starting in the early twenties, its development and production were repeatedly delayed, resulting in a vehicle that was both technologically complex and expensive, and already obsolescent when real mass-production of a derived version, the Char B1 "bis", started in the late thirties.
The outer appearance of the Char B1 reflected the fact that development started in the twenties: like the very first tank, the British Mark I tank of World War I, it still had large tracks going around the entire hull and large armour plates protecting the suspension—and like all tanks of that decade it had no welded or cast hull armour. The similarity resulted partly from the fact that the Char B1 was a specialized offensive weapon, a break-through tank optimized for punching a hole into strong defensive entrenchments, so it was designed with good trench-crossing capabilities and therefore the hull and the tracks had considerable length. The French Army thought that dislodging the enemy from a key front sector would decide a campaign, and it prided itself on being the only army in the world having a sufficient number of adequately protected heavy tanks. The exploitation phase of a battle was seen as secondary and best carried out by controlled and methodical movement to ensure superiority in numbers, so that the heavy tank’s mobility was of secondary concern. Although the Char B1 had a reasonably good speed for the time of its conception, no serious efforts were made to improve it when much faster tanks appeared.
More important than the tank's limitations in tactical mobility, however, were its limitations in strategic mobility. The low practical range implied the need to refuel very often, limiting its operational capabilities. This again implied that the armoured divisions of the Infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées, were not very effective as a mobile reserve and thus lacked strategic flexibility. They were not created to fulfill such a role in the first place, which was reflected in the small size of the artillery and infantry components of the divisions.
Another explanation of the similarity to the British Mark I lies in the Char B1's original specification to create a self-propelled gun able to destroy enemy infantry and artillery. The main weapon of the tank was its 75 mm howitzer, and the entire design of the vehicle was directed to making this gun as effective as possible. When in the early 1930s it became obvious that the Char B1 also had to defeat counterattacking enemy armour, it was too late for a complete redesign. The solution was to add the standard cast APX-1 turret which also equipped the Char D2 and the Somua S35. Like most French tanks of the period the Char B thus had a small one-man turret. The commander not only had to command the tank, but also to aim and load the anti-tank gun, and if he was a unit leader, he had to command his other tanks as well. This was in contrast with the contemporary German, British and to a lesser extent Soviet policy to use two or three-man turret crews, in which these duties were divided amongst several men, or to use dedicated command vehicles.
Among the most powerfully armed and armoured tanks of its day, the Char B1 was very effective in direct confrontations with early German armour during the Battle of France. The 60 mm (2.36 in) frontal armor was sloped, giving it an effective strength of near 80 mm (3.15 in), and it proved to be almost invulnerable to the 1940 Panzer II and III as well as the early Panzer IV with its short 75mm close-support gun. There were no real weak spots, and this invulnerability helped the B1 to close on targets, then destroy them with the turret 47 mm (1.85 in) or the brute force of the howitzer HE shells. However, its slow speed and high fuel consumption made it ill-adapted to the war of movement then being fought.
In the meantime, plans had taken shape to improve the Char B1, and this led to two developments that eventually entered the hardware stage: A further up-armoured version, the Char B1 "ter", was designed with sloped and welded 70 mm armour, weighing 36.6 tonnes and powered by a 350 hp (260 kW) engine. It was meant to replace the B1 bis to accelerate mass production, a change first intended for the summer of 1940 but later postponed to March 1941 and finally abandoned.
In the course of the redesign, space was provided for a fifth crew member, a "mechanic". Cost was reduced by omitting the complex Neader transmission for aiming the howitzer and giving the hull gun a traverse of five degrees to each side instead. The first prototype was shown in 1937, but only three prototypes could be partly finished before the defeat of France. Serial production was rejected due to the need to build totally new production lines for the much-modified Char B1 ter, so that this development was a dead end, even more so because it did not really cure the vehicle’s weakness of the overburdened commander and the split armament.
The latter issues were addressed with another development, a modernized variant of the existing Char B1 bis with a new weapon layout, the Char B1 “tetre”. Work on this variant started in 1936, as an alternative concept to the one-man turret and as an experimental carrier for a new high velocity semi-automatic 75 mm multi-purpose gun with a long barrel. Such a weapon was direly needed, because the biggest caliber of an anti-tank gun was a mere 47 mm, the SA 35 gun. The only recent alternative was the infantry’s 47 mm APX anti-tank gun from 1937, which could pierce 60 mm (2.4 in) at 550 meters (600 yd) or 80 mm (3.1 in) at 180 meters (200 yd), but it had not been adapted to vehicle use yet and was not regarded to be powerful enough to cope with tanks like the Char B1 itself.
This new 75 mm tank gun was already under development at the Atelier de Construction de Rueil (ARL) for a new medium 20-ton-tank, the Char G1 from Renault, that was to replace the Char B1. The gun, called “ARL 37”, would be mounted in a new three-man turret, and ARL was developing prototypes of both a turret that could be taken by the Char B1’s and S35’s limited turret ring, as well as the gun itself, which was based on the 75 mm high velocity gun with hydro-pneumatic recoil compensation from the vintage heavy FCM 2C tank
The ARL 37 had a mass of 750 kg (1,653.5 lb) and a barrel length of 3,281 mm (129.2 in) with a bore of 43 calibers. Maximum muzzle velocity was 740 m/s (2,400 ft/s). The gun was fitted with an electric firing mechanism and the breech operated semi-automatically. Only one-piece ammunition was used, and both HE and AP rounds could be fired – even though the latter had to developed, too, because no such round was available in 1937/38 yet. However, with early experimental Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap (APCBC) rounds, the ARL 37 was able to penetrate 133 mm (5.2 in) of vertical steel plate at 100 m range, 107 mm (4.2 in) at 1.000 m and still 85 mm (3.3 in) at 2.000 m, making it a powerful anti-tank weapon of its era.
Since the new weapon was expected to fire both HE and AP rounds, the Char B1’s howitzer in the hull was omitted, its opening faired over and instead a movable 7.5 mm Reibel machine gun was added in a ball mount, operated by a radio operator who sat next to the driver. Another 7.5mm machine gun was mounted co-axially to the main gun in the turret, which had a cupola and offered space for the rest of the crew: a dedicated commander as well as a gunner and loader team.
The hexagonal turret was cast and had a welded roof as well as a gun mantlet. With its 70 mm frontal armor as well as the tank’s new hull front section, the conversions added a total of four net tons of weight, so that the Char B1 tetre weighed 36 tons. To prevent its performance from deteriorating further, it received the Char B1 ter’s uprated 350 hp (260 kW) engine. The running gear remained unchanged, even though the fully rotating turret made the complex and expensive Neader transmission superfluous, so that it was replaced by a standard heavy-duty piece.
Although promising, the Char B1 tetre’s development was slow, delayed by the lack of resources and many teething troubles with the new 75 mm cannon and the turret. When the war broke out in September 1939, production was cleared and began slowly, but focus remained on existing vehicles and weapons. By the time there were perhaps 180 operational B1 and B1 bis in all. They were used for the Sarre offensive, a short-lived burst without serious opposition, with a massive force of 41 divisions and 2.400 tanks. The Char B1 served with the armoured divisions of the infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées (DCr). The First and Second DCR had 69 Char B1s each, the Third 68. These were highly specialized offensive units, to break through fortified positions. The mobile phase of a battle was to be carried out by the Divisions Légères Mécaniques (mechanised light divisions) of the cavalry, equipped with the SOMUA S35.
After the German invasion several ad hoc units were formed: the 4e DCr with 52 Char B1s and five autonomous companies (347e, 348e, 349e, 352e and 353e Compagnie Autonome de Chars) with in total 56 tanks: 12 B1s and 44 B1 bis; 28e BCC was reconstituted with 34 tanks. By that time, a very limited number of Char B1 tetre had been produced and delivered to operational units, but their tactical value was low since sufficient 75 mm AP rounds were not available – the tanks had to use primarily the same HE rounds that were fired with the Char B1’s howitzer, and these posed only a limited threat to German tanks, esp. the upgraded Panzer III and IVs. The Char B1 tertre’s potential was never fully exploited, even though most of the tanks were used as command vehicles.
The regular French divisions destroyed quite a few German tanks but lacked enough organic infantry and artillery to function as an effective mobile reserve. After the defeat of France, captured Char B1 of all variants would be used by Germany, with some rebuilt as flamethrowers, Munitionspanzer, or mechanized artillery.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (driver, radio operator/machine gunner, commander, gunner, loader)
Weight: 36 tonnes (40 short tons, 35 long tons)
Length: 6.98 m (22 ft 10½ in) overall with gun forward
6.37 m (20 ft 11 in) hull only
Width: 2.46 m (8 ft 1 in)
Height: 2.84 m (9 ft 3¾ in)
Ground clearance: 40 cm (1 ft 3¾ in)
Climbing: 93 cm (3 ft ½ in)
Trench crossing: 2,4 m (7 ft 10½ in)
Suspension: Bogies with a mixture of vertical coil and leaf springs
Steering: Double differential
Fuel capacity: 400 liters
Armour:
14 to 70 mm (0.55 to 2.75 in)
Performance:
28 km/h (17 mph) on road
21 km/h (13 mph) off-road
Operational range: 200 km (124 mi) on road
Power/weight: 9.7 hp/ton
Engine:
1× Renault inline 6 cylinder 16.5 litre petrol engine with 350 hp (260 kW)
Transmission:
5 forward and 1 rear gear
Armament:
1x 75 ARL 37 high-velocity cannon with 94 rounds
2x 7.5 mm (0.295 in) Reibel machine guns with a total of 5,250 rounds
The kit and its assembly:.
This fictional Char B1 variant was based on the question what the tank could have looked like if there had been a suitable 75 mm gun available that could replace both its howitzer in the hull and the rather light anti-tank gun in the turret? No such weapon existed in France, but I tried to extrapolate the concept based on the standard Char B1 hull.
Two big changes were made: the first concerned the hull howitzer, which was deleted, and its recessed opening faired over with 1 mm styrene sheet and putty. This sound easier as it turned out to be because the suspension for the front right idler wheel had to be retained, and the complex shape of the glacis plate and the opening called for patchwork. A fairing for the co-driver was added as well as a ball mount for the new hull machine gun. New shackles were added to the lower front and, finally, new rows of bolt heads (created with white glue).
The turret was completely replaced with a cast turret from a 1943 T-34/76 (Zvezda kit). While its shape and gun mantlet are quite characteristic, I still used it mostly OOB because its size and shape turned out to be a very good match to contemporary French tank turrets. However, the gun barrel was moved and a fairing for a hydro-pneumatic recoil damper was added, as well as a French commander cupola. And an adapter had to be scratched to attach the new turret to the hull, together with small fairings for the wider turret ring.
Painting and markings:
I wanted a rather unusual paint scheme for this Char B1 derivative, and found inspiration in an operational museum tank that depicts vehicle “311/Rhin”: it carries a three-tone livery in two greens and brown, instead of the more common sand, dark green and earth brown tones or just two-tone schemes.
The colors were adapted to an irregular pattern, and the paints I used were Humbrol 120 (FS 34227, a rather pale interpretation of the tone), 10 (Gloss Dark Brown) and ModelMaster 1764 (FS 34092). As a personal twist, the colors were edged in black, enhancing the contrast.
The markings were puzzled together from various sources in an attempt to create suitable tactical codes of the early 1940 era. The “Ace of Spades” emblem on the turret is, for example, are a marking of the 1st section. The dot in front of the “K” probably indicated a command vehicle, but I am not certain.
Some post-shading was done as well as dry-brushing with light earth brown to emphasize edges and details. Then the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and received some dusting with grey-brown artist pigments, simulating dust around the running gear.
Well, not too much was changed, but the new, bigger turret changes the Char B1’s look considerably – it looks somewhat smaller now? Its new silhouette also reminds me of a duck? Weird, but the conversion worked out well – esp. the modified glacis plate without the howitzer’s recessed opening looks very natural.
Wandering around University of Toronto, a bit miffed because my planned shots were thwarted by the Pan Am Games closures, I came across this war memorial.
From the University of St. Michael's College web site:
Over 3401 St. Michael’s Alumni served in the military in the ‘Great War’; 32 died in the line of duty. These numbers may not seem remarkable until one reads the ‘Honour Roll’ in the SMC Year Book of 1918. It is there that Fr. Michael J. Oliver, CSB, 1T0 (BA), teacher and administrator of the high school, and Secretary of the ‘Honour Roll’ tells us some rather astonishing figures. From the school’s inception in 1852, the student body was relatively small, usually numbering 100 to 150 in total. Fr. Oliver states, “only recently, (1910?) owing to an increase in the number of Toronto students, has the number exceeded 200” – now remember this was written in 1918, so even if we extrapolate growth we probably would not exceed 225-235.
As well, again quoting Fr. Oliver, “St. Michael’s students/graduates were to a great extent prevented from enlisting by reason of their ‘office’. This affected only college students who, as priests and theological students, had taken ‘orders’. Yet Fr. Oliver says, “we have no hesitation in saying that the following list is not more than half the full number because no organized effort was made to make the list complete.”
We must also bear in mind another major fact – up until probably 1900-1910 the student body had significant numbers of Americans. Fr. Oliver says, “In 1905, 30% were from the U.S.; in 1895, 50% and prior to that even a larger number”.
It is important here to note therefore, volunteers to the U.S. military are, in the main, not included in the data presented. It was on 2nd February 1917, that President Woodrow Wilson severed diplomatic relations with Germany et al. Subsequently, when the Germans promised aid to Mexico should the Mexicans attack the United States (and British intelligence ensured that the Americans would see this), President Wilson and the U.S. Congress declared war on the 7th April 1917. We shall come back to this matter further on.
No form of remembrance for the fallen was provided, until in 1945, St. Michael’s and the Basilian Fathers decided to erect a memorial to all Alumni killed in the Great War. Time passed, but nothing really happened for nearly 40 years. In 1921, The University of Toronto published a Roll of Service 1914-1918 and a ‘Roll of Honour’ for those ‘Killed in Action’ or ‘Died in Service’, but this only encompassed those enrolled in University / College – our High School volunteers and those who died in service received no equal remembrance. As well, Hart House Soldiers Tower on the University campus created its ‘Memorial Archway’ where the names of the known dead from all colleges and faculties are enshrined. (Newman Chapel [St. Thomas Aquinas] also has a small remembrance plaque).
However, in late 1985 Fr. William H. O’Brien CSB, 4T3; Lieutenant (Rt’d) Royal Canadian Artillery, decided that such a remembrance had to come to fruition (See Appendix ‘A’). He became the moving spirit that culminated in the memorial carved into the stone of the ‘slype’ between More and Fisher Houses and dedicated to the memory of the 32 alumni of both College and High School who died. It was completed in the November 1988 in time for the Remembrance Day service on 11 November.
Subsequently, Fr. Bill, who in retirement had become the archivist at St. Michael’s College School, had a similar ‘Remembrance Wall’ put in place on the outside west wall of the College School chapel. It was dedicated in 2000, a year and a half after his death.
St. Michael's College Memorial to the Fallen
If you were to travel to Northern France and Belgium you would find the many memorials in the hundreds of cemeteries that dot the countryside. They hold the graves of most of the more than 66,655 Canadians who never returned from the ‘Great War’ - with close to a third resting in unidentified or unknown graves. The names of those known are cut into their headstones; others show ‘A Soldier of the Great War’ above the cross, and below ‘Known Unto God’. All with no known graves have their names incised in the newly refurbished main memorial at Vimy Ridge (approx 19,000+). As well, there are many war dead, including Canadian, who are buried in multicultural, local church cemeteries and cemeteries of many other mid and northern European countries.
This High Dynamic Range 360° panorama was stitched from 162 bracketed photographs with PTGUI Pro, tone-mapped with Photomatix, processed with Color Efex, then touched up in Aperture.
Original size: 20000 × 10000 (200.0 MP; 1.04 GB).
Location: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Pictures by Massimo Vitali
Drum scan by CastorScan
n2 Kodak Portra 11x14" color negatives.
-----
CastorScan's philosophy is completely oriented to provide the highest scan and postproduction
quality on the globe.
We work with artists, photographers, agencies, laboratories etc. who demand a state-of-the-art quality at reasonable prices.
Our workflow is fully manual and extremely meticulous in any stage.
We developed exclusive workflows and profilation systems to obtain unparallel results from our scanners not achievable through semi-automatic and usual workflows.
-----
CastorScan uses the best scanners in circulation, Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II, the best and most advanced scanner ever made, Kodak-Creo IQSmart 3, a high-end flatbed scanner, and Imacon 848.
The image quality offered by our Dainippon Screen 8060 scanner is much higher than that achievable with the best flatbed scanners or filmscanners dedicated and superior to that of scanners so-called "virtual drum" (Imacon – Hasselblad,) and, of course, vastly superior to that amateur or prosumer obtained with scanners such as Epson V750 etc .
Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II exceeds in quality any other scanner, including Aztek Premier and ICG 380 (in the results, not just in the technical specifications).
8060's main features: 12000 dpi, Hi-Q Xenon lamp, 25 apertures, 2 micron
Aztek Premier's main features: 8000 dpi, halogen lamp, 18 apertures, 3 micron
ICG 380's main features: 12000 dpi, halogen lamp, 9 apertures, 4 micron
Some of the features that make the quality of our drum scanners better than any other existing scan system include:
The scans performed on a drum scanner are famous for their detail, depth and realism.
Scans are much cleaner and show fewer imperfections than scans obtained from CCD scanners, and thus save many hours of cleaning and spotting in postproduction.
Image acquisition by the drum scanner is optically similar to using a microscopic lens that scans the image point by point with extreme precision and without deformation or distortion of any kind, while other scanners use enlarger lenses (such as the Rodenstock-Linos Magnagon 75mm f8 used in the Hasselblad-Imacon scanners) and have transmission systems with rubber bands: this involves mild but effective micro-strain and micro-geometric image distortions and quality is not uniform between the center and edges.
Drum scanners are exempt from problems of flatness of the originals, since the same are mounted on a perfectly balanced transparent acrylic drum; on the contrary, the dedicated film scanners that scan slides or negatives in their plastic frames are subject to quite significant inaccuracies, as well as the Imacon-Hasselblad scanners, which have their own rubber and plastic holders: they do not guarantee the perfect flatness of the original and therefore a uniform definition between center and edge, especially with medium and large size originals, which instead are guaranteed by drum scanners.
Again, drum scanners allow scanning at high resolution over the entire surface of the cylinder, while for example the Hasselblad Imacon scans are limited to 3200 dpi in 120 format and 2000 dpi in 4x5" format (the resolution of nearly every CCD scanner in the market drops as the size of the original scanned is increased).
Drum scanners allow complete scanning of the whole negative, including the black-orange mask, perforations etc, while using many other scanners a certain percentage of the image is lost because it is covered by frames or holders.
Drum scanners use photomultiplier tubes to record the light signal, which are much more sensitive than CCDs and can record many more nuances and variations in contrast with a lower digital noise.
If you look at a monitor at 100% the detail in shadows and darker areas of a scan made with a CCD scanner, you will notice that the details are not recorded in a clear and clean way, and the colors are more opaque and less differentiated. Additionally the overall tones are much less rich and differentiated.
We would like to say a few words about an unscrupulous and deceitful use of technical specifications reported by many manufacturers of consumer and prosumer scanners; very often we read of scanners that promise cheap or relatively cheap “drum scanner” resolutions, 16 bits of color depth, extremely high DMAX: we would like to say that these “nominal” resolutions do not correspond to an actual optical resolution, so that even in low-resolution scanning you can see an enormous gap between drum scanners and these scanners in terms of detail, as well as in terms of DMAX, color range, realism, “quality” of grain. So very often when using these consumer-prosumer scanners at high resolutions, it is normal to get a disproportionate increase of file size in MB but not an increase of detail and quality.
To give a concrete example: a drum scan of a 24x36mm color negative film at 3500 dpi is much more defined than a scan made with mostly CCD scanner at 8000 dpi and a drum scan at 2500 dpi is dramatically clearer than a scan at 2500 dpi provided by a CCD scanner. So be aware and careful with incorrect advertisement.
Scans can be performed either dry or liquid-mounted. The wet mounting further improves cleanliness (helps to hide dirt, scratches and blemishes) and plasticity of the image without compromising the original, and in addition by mounting with liquid the film grain is greatly reduced and it looks much softer and more pleasant than the usual "harsh" grain resulting from dry scans.
We use Kami SMF 2001 liquid to mount the transparencies and Kami RC 2001 for cleaning the same. Kami SMF 2001 evaporates without leaving traces, unlike the traditional oil scans, ensuring maximum protection for your film. Out of ignorance some people prefer to avoid liquid scanning because they fear that their films will be dirty or damaged: this argument may be plausible only in reference to scans made using mineral oils, which have nothing to do with the specific professional products we use.
We strongly reiterate that your original is in no way compromised by our scanning liquid and will return as you have shipped it, if not cleaner.
With respect to scanning from slides:
Our scanners are carefully calibrated with the finest IT8 calibration targets in circulation and with special customized targets in order to ensure that each scan faithfully reproduces the original color richness even in the most subtle nuances, opening and maintaining detail in shadows and highlights. These color profiles allow our scanners to realize their full potential, so we guarantee our customers that even from a chromatic point of view our scans are noticeably better than similar scans made by mostly other scan services in the market.
In addition, we remind you that our 8060 drum scanner is able to read the deepest shadows of slides without digital noise and with much more detail than CCD scanners; also, the color range and color realism are far better.
With respect to scanning from color and bw negatives: we want to emphasize the superiority of our drum scans not only in scanning slides, but also in color and bw negative scanning (because of the orange mask and of very low contrast is extremely difficult for any ccd scanner to read the very slight tonal and contrast nuances in the color negative, while a perfectly profiled 8060 drum scanner – also through the analog gain/white calibration - can give back much more realistic images and true colors, sharper and more three-dimensional).
In spite of what many claim, a meticulous color profiling is essential not only for scanning slides, but also, and even more, for color negatives. Without it the scan of a color negative will produce chromatic errors rather significant, thus affecting the tonal balance and then the naturalness-pleasantness of the images.
More unique than rare, we do not use standardized profiles provided by the software to invert each specific negative film, because they do not take into account parameters and variables such as the type of development, the level of exposure, the type of light etc.,; at the same time we also avoid systems of "artificial intelligence" or other functions provided by semi-automatic scanning softwares, but instead we carry out the inversion in a full manual workflow for each individual picture.
In addition, scanning with Imacon-Hasselblad scanners we do not use their proprietary software - Flexcolor – to make color management and color inversion because we strongly believe that our alternative workflow provides much better results, and we are able to prove it with absolute clarity.
At each stage of the process we take care of meticulously adjusting the scanning parameters to the characteristics of the originals, to extrapolate the whole range of information possible from any image without "burning" or reductions in the tonal range, and strictly according to our customer's need and taste.
By default, we do not apply unsharp mask (USM) in our scans, except on request.
To scan reflective originals we follow the same guidelines and guarantee the same quality standard.
We guarantee the utmost thoroughness and expertise in the work of scanning and handling of the originals and we provide scans up to 12,000 dpi of resolution, at 16-bit, in RGB, GRAYSCALE, LAB or CMYK color mode; unless otherwise indicated, files are saved with Adobe RGB 1998 or ProPhoto RGB color profile.
I found myself in a plane this week and I also had my Fullespectrum camera at hand, fitted with a 680nm filter. The weather was favourable with a bright sun and some puffy clouds. I had set my white balance to a custom setting, giving me a blue tone to all the greens. It was amazing just to look through my viewfinder and see the alien landscape fly by, but I did manage to snap a few shots.
Later on I realised I would have a hard time figuring out the locations I shot. But with a bit of google maps and a bit of flightpath extrapolations I managed to at least figure out one location.
This image depicts a view over Marseille on the right, and Parc national des Calanques at the bottom of the photo, with the dark waters of the Mediterranean Sea to the left.
+++ 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 Gloster Glaive was basically a modernized and re-engined variant of the successful, British-built Gloster Gladiator (or Gloster SS.37), the RAF’s final biplane fighter to enter service. The Gladiator was not only widely used by the RAF at the dawn of WWII and in almost every theatre of operations, but also by many other nations. Operators included Norway, Belgium, Sweden, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania or Nationalist China, and while the RAF already opted for more modern monoplanes, Gloster saw the opportunity to sell an updated Gladiator to countries which were not as progressive.
Originally designated Gladiator Mk. IV, the machine received many aerodynamic refinements and the motor was changed from a draggy radial to a liquid-cooled inline engine. The latter was the new Rolls Royce Peregrine, a development of the Kestrel. It was, in its original form, a 21-litre (1,300 cu in) liquid-cooled V-12 aero engine ), delivering 885-horsepower (660 kW). The engine was housed under a streamlined cowling, driving a three blade metal propeller, and was coupled with a ventral radiator bath, reminiscent of the Hawker Fury biplane’s arrangement.
Structural improvements included an all-metal monocoque fuselage and stabilizers, as well as new wings and streamlined struts with reduced bracing. The upper wing was enlarged and of all-metal construction, too, while the lower wings were reduced in span and area, almost resulting in a sesquiplane layout. The total wing area was only marginally reduced, though.
The fixed landing gear was retained, but the main wheels were now covered with spats. The pilot still sat in a fully enclosed cockpit, the armament consisted of four machine guns, similar to the Gladiator. But for the Glaive, all Browning machine guns were synchronized and mounted in the fuselage: one pair was placed on top of the cowling, in front of the cockpit. Another pair, much like the Gladiator’s arrangement was placed in the fuselage flanks, below the exhaust outlets.
Compared with the Gladiator, the design changes were so fundamental that Gloster eventually decided to allocate a separate designation – also with a view to the type’s foreign marketing, since a new aircraft appeared more attractive than another mark of a pre-war design. For the type’s virgin flight in late 1938 the name “Glaive” was unveiled to the public, and several smaller European air forces immediately showed interest, including Greece, Croatia, Turkey, Portugal and Egypt.
Greece was one of the initial customers, and the first of a total of 24 aircraft for the Hellenic Air Force was delivered in early 1939, with 24 more on order (which were never delivered, though). The initial batch arrived just in time, since tension had been building between Greece and Italy since 7 April 1939, when Italian troops occupied Albania. On 28 October 1940, Italy issued an ultimatum to Greece, which was promptly rejected. A few hours later, Italian troops launched an invasion of Greece, initiating the Greco-Italian War.
The Hellenic Gloster Glaives were split among three Mirae Dioxeos (Fighter Squadrons): the 21st at Trikala, 22nd at Thessaloniki and 23rd at Larissa. When Italy attacked in October 1940, the British fighter was, together with the PZL 24, the Greeks' only modern type in adequate numbers. However, by late 1940, the Gloster Glaive was already no longer a front-runner despite a powerful powerplant and satisfactory armament. It had no speed advantage over the Fiat Cr.42 nor could it outfly the nimble Italian biplane, and it was much slower than the Macchi MC.200 and the Fiat G.50 it was pitted against. Its agility was the only real advantage against the Italian fighters, whose reliance on the slow firing Breda-SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns proved detrimental.
Anyway, on 5 April 1941, German forces invaded Greece and quickly established air superiority. As the Allied troops retreated, British and Hellenic forces covered them, before flying to Crete during the last week of April. There, the refugee aircraft recorded a few claims over twin-engine aircraft before being evacuated to Egypt during the Battle of Crete.
Overall, the Glaives performed gallantly during the early period of the conflict, holding their own against impossible numerical odds and despite the fact that their main target were enemy bombers which forced them to fight at a disadvantage against enemy fighters. Italian claims of easy superiority over the Albanian front were vastly over-rated and their kill claims even exceeded the total number of operational fighters on the Greek side. Total Greek fighter losses in combat came to 24 a/c with the Greek fighter pilots claiming 64 confirmed kills and 24 probables (about two third bombers).
By April 1941, however, lack of spares and attrition had forced the Hellenic Air Force to merge the surviving seven Glaives with five leftover PZL.24s into one understrength squadron supported by five Gloster Gladiators Mk I & II and the two surviving MB.151s. These fought hopelessly against the Luftwaffe onslaught, and most aircraft were eventually lost on the ground. None of the Hellenic Gloster Glaives survived the conflict.
General characteristics:
Crew: two
Length: 8.92m (29 ft 3 in)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 11 ft 9 in (3.58 m)
Wing area: 317 ft² (29.4 m²)
Empty weight: 1,295 kg (2,855 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,700 kg (3,748 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Rolls Royce Peregrine II liquid-cooled V12 inline engine, rated at 940 hp (700 kw)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 405 km/h (252 mph; 219 kn) at 4,400 m (14,436 ft)
Cruise speed: 345 km/h (214 mph; 186 kn)
Stall speed: 60 mph (52 knots, 96 km/h)
Range: 373 mi (600 km; 324 nmi)
Endurance: 2 hours
Service ceiling: 10,600 m (34,800 ft)
Rate of climb: 2,982 ft/min (15.15 m/s)
Time to altitude: 10.000 ft (3.050 m) in 3 minutes 20 seconds
Armament:
4× 0.303 calibre (7.7 mm) M1919 Browning machine guns in the fuselage
Provisions for 6× 10 kg (22 lb) or 4x 20 kg (44 lb) bombs under the lower wings
The kit and its assembly:
The fictional Gloster Glaive started quite simple with the idea of replacing the Gladiator’s radial with an inline engine. But this soon did not appear enough for an update – the Peregrine hardly delivered much more power than the former Mercury, so I considered some structural updates, too. Most of them comprised the replacement of former fabric-covered structures, and this led conceptually to a kitbash with only some Gladiator fuselage and tail parts left.
The basis is (once more) the very nice Matchbox Gloster Gladiator, but it was heavily modified. As an initial step, fuselage, fin and stabilizers (all OOB parts) lost their rib-and-fabric structure, simply sanded away. A minor detail, but it changes the overall look of the aircraft a lot, making it appear much more modern.
The fuselage was left without the OOB radial, and instead a leftover Merlin front end from an Airfix Hurricane (ca. 1cm long, left over from one of my first whif builds ever, a Hurricane with a radial engine!) was added. The lines match pretty well: the side profile looks sleek, if not elegant, but the Gladiator fuselage turned out to be wider than expected. Some major body work/PSR was necessary to integrate the new nose, but the result looks very good.
The liquid-cooled engine necessitated a radiator somewhere on the airframe…! Since I wanted the nose to remain slim and streamlined I eventually placed the radiator bath under the fuselage, much like the arrangement of the Hawker Fury biplane. The radiator itself comes from a late Spitfire (FROG kit).
The exhaust was taken from the Hurricane kit, too, and matching slits dug into the putty nose to take them. The three blade propeller is a mash-up, too: the spinner belongs, IIRC, to an early Spitfire (left over from an AZ Models kit) while the blades came from a damaged Matchbox Brewster Buffalo.
The Gladiator’s fuselage flank machine guns were kept and their “bullet channels” extrapolated along the new cowling, running under the new exhaust pipes. Another pair of machine guns were placed on top of the engine – for these, openings were carved into the upper hull and small fairings (similar to the Browning guns in the flanks) added. This arrangement appeared plausible to me, since the Gladiator’s oil cooler was not necessary anymore and the new lower wings (see below) were not big enough anymore to take the Gladiator’s underwing guns. Four MGs in the fuselage appears massive – but there were other types with such an arrangement, e.g. the Avia B-534 with four guns in the flanks and an inline engine.
The wings are complete replacements: the upper wing comes from a Heller Curtiss SBC4, while the lower wings as well as the spats (on shortened OOB Gladiator struts) come from an ICM Polikarpov I-153. All struts were scratched. Once the lower wings were in place and the relative position of the upper wing clear, the outer struts were carved from 1mm styrene sheet, using the I-153 design as benchmark. These were glued to the lower wing first, and, once totally dry after 24h, the upper wing was simply glued onto the top and the wing position adjusted. This was left to dry another 24h, and as a final step the four struts above the cowling (using the OOB struts, but as single parts and trimmed for proper fit) were placed. This way, a stable connection is guaranteed – and the result is surprisingly sturdy.
Rigging was done with heated sprue material – my personal favorite for this delicate task, and executed before painting the kit started so that the glue could cure and bond well.
Painting and markings:
The reason why this aircraft ended in Greek service is a color photograph of a crashed Hellenic Bloch M.B. 152 (coded ‘D 177’, to be specific). I guess that the picture was post-colored, though, because the aircraft of French origin sports rather weird colors: the picture shows a two-tone scheme in a deep, rather reddish chestnut brown and a light green that almost looks like teal. Unique, to say the least... Underside colors couldn’t be identified with certainty in the picture, but appeared like a pale but not too light blue grey.
Anyway, I assume that these colors are pure fiction and exaggerated Photoshop work, since the few M.B. 152s delivered to Greece carried AFAIK standard French camouflage (in French Khaki, Chestnut Brown and Blue-Grey on the upper surfaces, and a very light blue-grey from below). I’d assume that the contrast between the grey and green tones was not very obvious in the original photograph, so that the artist, not familiar with WWII paint schemes, replaced both colors with the strange teal tone and massively overmodulated the brown.
As weird as it looked, I liked this design and used it as an inspirational benchmark for my Hellenic Glaive build. After all, it’s a fictional aircraft… Upper basic colors are Humbrol 31 (RAF Slate Grey) and 160 (German Camouflage Red Brown), while the undersides became French Dark Blue Grey (ModelMaster Authentics 2105). The result looks rather odd…
Representing a combat-worn aircraft, I applied a thorough black ink wash and did heavier panel shading and dry-brushing on the leading edges, along with some visible touches of aluminum.
The Hellenic roundels come from a TL Modellbau aftermarket sheet. The tactical code was puzzled together from single letters, and the Greek “D” was created from single decal strips. For better contrast I used white decals – most Hellenic aircraft of the time had black codes, but the contrast is much better, and I found evidence that some machines actually carried white codes. The small fin flash is another free interpretation. Not every Hellenic aircraft carried these markings, and instead of painting the whole rudder in Greek colors I just applied a small fin flash. This was created with white and blue decal strips, closely matching the roundels’ colors.
Finally, after some soot stains around the guns and the exhausts, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Modified beyond recognition, perhaps…? The fictional Gloster Glaive looks IMHO good and very modern, just like one of those final biplane designs that were about to be outrun by monoplanes at the brink of WWII.
N3 LightJet prints 180x300 cm on Kodak Endura Paper
Scans by CastorScan
Stampe digitali LightJet 180x300 cm su carta Kodak Endura.
Scansioni da negativi colore Kodak Portra 160NC 12x20 pollici (30x51 cm) realizzate da CastorScan su scanner a tamburo.
-----
CastorScan's philosophy is completely oriented to provide the highest scan and postproduction
quality on the globe.
We work with artists, photographers, agencies, laboratories etc. who demand a state-of-the-art quality at reasonable prices.
Our workflow is fully manual and extremely meticulous in any stage.
We developed exclusive workflows and profilation systems to obtain unparallel results from our scanners not achievable through semi-automatic and usual workflows.
-----
CastorScan uses the best scanners in circulation, Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II, the best and most advanced scanner ever made, Kodak-Creo IQSmart 3, a high-end flatbed scanner, and Imacon 848.
The image quality offered by our Dainippon Screen 8060 scanner is much higher than that achievable with the best flatbed scanners or filmscanners dedicated and superior to that of scanners so-called "virtual drum" (Imacon – Hasselblad,) and, of course, vastly superior to that amateur or prosumer obtained with scanners such as Epson V750 etc .
Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II exceeds in quality any other scanner, including Aztek Premier and ICG 380 (in the results, not just in the technical specifications).
8060's main features: 12000 dpi, Hi-Q Xenon lamp, 25 apertures, 2 micron
Aztek Premier's main features: 8000 dpi, halogen lamp, 18 apertures, 3 micron
ICG 380's main features: 12000 dpi, halogen lamp, 9 apertures, 4 micron
Some of the features that make the quality of our drum scanners better than any other existing scan system include:
The scans performed on a drum scanner are famous for their detail, depth and realism.
Scans are much cleaner and show fewer imperfections than scans obtained from CCD scanners, and thus save many hours of cleaning and spotting in postproduction.
Image acquisition by the drum scanner is optically similar to using a microscopic lens that scans the image point by point with extreme precision and without deformation or distortion of any kind, while other scanners use enlarger lenses (such as the Rodenstock-Linos Magnagon 75mm f8 used in the Hasselblad-Imacon scanners) and have transmission systems with rubber bands: this involves mild but effective micro-strain and micro-geometric image distortions and quality is not uniform between the center and edges.
Drum scanners are exempt from problems of flatness of the originals, since the same are mounted on a perfectly balanced transparent acrylic drum; on the contrary, the dedicated film scanners that scan slides or negatives in their plastic frames are subject to quite significant inaccuracies, as well as the Imacon-Hasselblad scanners, which have their own rubber and plastic holders: they do not guarantee the perfect flatness of the original and therefore a uniform definition between center and edge, especially with medium and large size originals, which instead are guaranteed by drum scanners.
Again, drum scanners allow scanning at high resolution over the entire surface of the cylinder, while for example the Hasselblad Imacon scans are limited to 3200 dpi in 120 format and 2000 dpi in 4x5" format (the resolution of nearly every CCD scanner in the market drops as the size of the original scanned is increased).
Drum scanners allow complete scanning of the whole negative, including the black-orange mask, perforations etc, while using many other scanners a certain percentage of the image is lost because it is covered by frames or holders.
Drum scanners use photomultiplier tubes to record the light signal, which are much more sensitive than CCDs and can record many more nuances and variations in contrast with a lower digital noise.
If you look at a monitor at 100% the detail in shadows and darker areas of a scan made with a CCD scanner, you will notice that the details are not recorded in a clear and clean way, and the colors are more opaque and less differentiated. Additionally the overall tones are much less rich and differentiated.
We would like to say a few words about an unscrupulous and deceitful use of technical specifications reported by many manufacturers of consumer and prosumer scanners; very often we read of scanners that promise cheap or relatively cheap “drum scanner” resolutions, 16 bits of color depth, extremely high DMAX: we would like to say that these “nominal” resolutions do not correspond to an actual optical resolution, so that even in low-resolution scanning you can see an enormous gap between drum scanners and these scanners in terms of detail, as well as in terms of DMAX, color range, realism, “quality” of grain. So very often when using these consumer-prosumer scanners at high resolutions, it is normal to get a disproportionate increase of file size in MB but not an increase of detail and quality.
To give a concrete example: a drum scan of a 24x36mm color negative film at 3500 dpi is much more defined than a scan made with mostly CCD scanner at 8000 dpi and a drum scan at 2500 dpi is dramatically clearer than a scan at 2500 dpi provided by a CCD scanner. So be aware and careful with incorrect advertisement.
Scans can be performed either dry or liquid-mounted. The wet mounting further improves cleanliness (helps to hide dirt, scratches and blemishes) and plasticity of the image without compromising the original, and in addition by mounting with liquid the film grain is greatly reduced and it looks much softer and more pleasant than the usual "harsh" grain resulting from dry scans.
We use Kami SMF 2001 liquid to mount the transparencies and Kami RC 2001 for cleaning the same. Kami SMF 2001 evaporates without leaving traces, unlike the traditional oil scans, ensuring maximum protection for your film. Out of ignorance some people prefer to avoid liquid scanning because they fear that their films will be dirty or damaged: this argument may be plausible only in reference to scans made using mineral oils, which have nothing to do with the specific professional products we use.
We strongly reiterate that your original is in no way compromised by our scanning liquid and will return as you have shipped it, if not cleaner.
With respect to scanning from slides:
Our scanners are carefully calibrated with the finest IT8 calibration targets in circulation and with special customized targets in order to ensure that each scan faithfully reproduces the original color richness even in the most subtle nuances, opening and maintaining detail in shadows and highlights. These color profiles allow our scanners to realize their full potential, so we guarantee our customers that even from a chromatic point of view our scans are noticeably better than similar scans made by mostly other scan services in the market.
In addition, we remind you that our 8060 drum scanner is able to read the deepest shadows of slides without digital noise and with much more detail than CCD scanners; also, the color range and color realism are far better.
With respect to scanning from color and bw negatives: we want to emphasize the superiority of our drum scans not only in scanning slides, but also in color and bw negative scanning (because of the orange mask and of very low contrast is extremely difficult for any ccd scanner to read the very slight tonal and contrast nuances in the color negative, while a perfectly profiled 8060 drum scanner – also through the analog gain/white calibration - can give back much more realistic images and true colors, sharper and more three-dimensional).
In spite of what many claim, a meticulous color profiling is essential not only for scanning slides, but also, and even more, for color negatives. Without it the scan of a color negative will produce chromatic errors rather significant, thus affecting the tonal balance and then the naturalness-pleasantness of the images.
More unique than rare, we do not use standardized profiles provided by the software to invert each specific negative film, because they do not take into account parameters and variables such as the type of development, the level of exposure, the type of light etc.,; at the same time we also avoid systems of "artificial intelligence" or other functions provided by semi-automatic scanning softwares, but instead we carry out the inversion in a full manual workflow for each individual picture.
In addition, scanning with Imacon-Hasselblad scanners we do not use their proprietary software - Flexcolor – to make color management and color inversion because we strongly believe that our alternative workflow provides much better results, and we are able to prove it with absolute clarity.
At each stage of the process we take care of meticulously adjusting the scanning parameters to the characteristics of the originals, to extrapolate the whole range of information possible from any image without "burning" or reductions in the tonal range, and strictly according to our customer's need and taste.
By default, we do not apply unsharp mask (USM) in our scans, except on request.
To scan reflective originals we follow the same guidelines and guarantee the same quality standard.
We guarantee the utmost thoroughness and expertise in the work of scanning and handling of the originals and we provide scans up to 12,000 dpi of resolution, at 16-bit, in RGB, GRAYSCALE, LAB or CMYK color mode; unless otherwise indicated, files are saved with Adobe RGB 1998 or ProPhoto RGB color profile.
+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.
On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).
After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.
Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.
Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.
However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.
As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.
The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.
The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.
Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).
However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.
Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.
The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.
The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.
As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.
Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.
With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position
15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot
Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)
Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)
Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)
Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)
Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)
Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;
plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks
Powerplant:
2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)
1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)
Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks
Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)
Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)
Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)
Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)
Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.86
Armament:
No internal guns.
4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,
plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)
AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs
The kit and its assembly:
Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.
However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.
The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.
Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.
On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.
The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.
Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.
The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.
Painting and markings:
No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.
Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).
The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).
The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.
After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.
Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).
The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.
The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.
Wandering around University of Toronto, a bit miffed because my planned shots were thwarted by the Pan Am Games closures, I came across this war memorial.
From the University of St. Michael's College web site:
Over 3401 St. Michael’s Alumni served in the military in the ‘Great War’; 32 died in the line of duty. These numbers may not seem remarkable until one reads the ‘Honour Roll’ in the SMC Year Book of 1918. It is there that Fr. Michael J. Oliver, CSB, 1T0 (BA), teacher and administrator of the high school, and Secretary of the ‘Honour Roll’ tells us some rather astonishing figures. From the school’s inception in 1852, the student body was relatively small, usually numbering 100 to 150 in total. Fr. Oliver states, “only recently, (1910?) owing to an increase in the number of Toronto students, has the number exceeded 200” – now remember this was written in 1918, so even if we extrapolate growth we probably would not exceed 225-235.
As well, again quoting Fr. Oliver, “St. Michael’s students/graduates were to a great extent prevented from enlisting by reason of their ‘office’. This affected only college students who, as priests and theological students, had taken ‘orders’. Yet Fr. Oliver says, “we have no hesitation in saying that the following list is not more than half the full number because no organized effort was made to make the list complete.”
We must also bear in mind another major fact – up until probably 1900-1910 the student body had significant numbers of Americans. Fr. Oliver says, “In 1905, 30% were from the U.S.; in 1895, 50% and prior to that even a larger number”.
It is important here to note therefore, volunteers to the U.S. military are, in the main, not included in the data presented. It was on 2nd February 1917, that President Woodrow Wilson severed diplomatic relations with Germany et al. Subsequently, when the Germans promised aid to Mexico should the Mexicans attack the United States (and British intelligence ensured that the Americans would see this), President Wilson and the U.S. Congress declared war on the 7th April 1917. We shall come back to this matter further on.
No form of remembrance for the fallen was provided, until in 1945, St. Michael’s and the Basilian Fathers decided to erect a memorial to all Alumni killed in the Great War. Time passed, but nothing really happened for nearly 40 years. In 1921, The University of Toronto published a Roll of Service 1914-1918 and a ‘Roll of Honour’ for those ‘Killed in Action’ or ‘Died in Service’, but this only encompassed those enrolled in University / College – our High School volunteers and those who died in service received no equal remembrance. As well, Hart House Soldiers Tower on the University campus created its ‘Memorial Archway’ where the names of the known dead from all colleges and faculties are enshrined. (Newman Chapel [St. Thomas Aquinas] also has a small remembrance plaque).
However, in late 1985 Fr. William H. O’Brien CSB, 4T3; Lieutenant (Rt’d) Royal Canadian Artillery, decided that such a remembrance had to come to fruition (See Appendix ‘A’). He became the moving spirit that culminated in the memorial carved into the stone of the ‘slype’ between More and Fisher Houses and dedicated to the memory of the 32 alumni of both College and High School who died. It was completed in the November 1988 in time for the Remembrance Day service on 11 November.
Subsequently, Fr. Bill, who in retirement had become the archivist at St. Michael’s College School, had a similar ‘Remembrance Wall’ put in place on the outside west wall of the College School chapel. It was dedicated in 2000, a year and a half after his death.
St. Michael's College Memorial to the Fallen
If you were to travel to Northern France and Belgium you would find the many memorials in the hundreds of cemeteries that dot the countryside. They hold the graves of most of the more than 66,655 Canadians who never returned from the ‘Great War’ - with close to a third resting in unidentified or unknown graves. The names of those known are cut into their headstones; others show ‘A Soldier of the Great War’ above the cross, and below ‘Known Unto God’. All with no known graves have their names incised in the newly refurbished main memorial at Vimy Ridge (approx 19,000+). As well, there are many war dead, including Canadian, who are buried in multicultural, local church cemeteries and cemeteries of many other mid and northern European countries.
According to Wikipedia, "the term slype is a variant of slip in the sense of a narrow passage; in architecture, the name for the covered passage usually found in monasteries or cathedrals between the transept and the chapter house". Learn something every day.
This High Dynamic Range 360° panorama was stitched from 162 bracketed photographs with PTGUI Pro, tone-mapped with Photomatix, processed with Color Efex, then touched up in Aperture.
Original size: 14859 × 14859 (220.8 MP; 416.16 MB).
Location: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
+++ 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 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engine fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. A comparable U.S. "Century Series" fighter was the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam. Furthermore, the North American YF-100 Super Sabre prototype appeared approximately one year after the MiG-19, making the MiG-19 the first operational supersonic jet in the world.
On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", also known as "SM-1". It was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines, a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3, with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 0.97) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 1.0) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).
After several prototypes with many detail improvements, the ministers of the Soviet Union issued the order #286-133 to start serial production on February 17, 1954, at the factories in Gorkiy and Novosibirsk. Factory trials were completed on September 12 the same year, and government trials started on September 30.
Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph), compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) for the MiG-15, combined with the lack of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.
Approximately 5,500 MiG-19's were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.
However, jet fighter development made huge leaps in the 1960s, and OKB MiG was constantly trying to improve the MiG-19's performance, esp. against fast and high-flying enemies, primarily bombers but also spy planes like the U-2.
As the MiG-19S was brought into service with the Soviet air forces in mid-1956, the OKB MiG was continuing the refinement of the SM-1/I-340 fighter. One of these evolutionary paths was the SM-12 (literally, “SM-1, second generation”) family of prototypes, the ultimate extrapolation of the basic MiG-19 design, which eventually led to the MiG-19bis interceptor that filled the gap between the MiG-19S and the following, highly successful MiG-21.
The SM-12 first saw life as an exercise in drag reduction by means of new air intake configurations, since the MiG-19’s original intake with rounded lips became inefficient at supersonic speed (its Western rival, the North American F-100, featured a sharp-lipped nose air intake from the start). The first of three prototypes, the SM-12/1, was essentially a MiG-19S with an extended and straight-tapered nose with sharp-lipped orifice and a pointed, two-position shock cone on the intake splitter. The simple arrangement proved to be successful and was further refined.
The next evolutionary step, the SM-12/3, differed from its predecessors primarily in two new R3-26 turbojets developed from the earlier power plant by V. N. Sorokin. These each offered an afterburning thrust of 3,600kg, enabling the SM-12/3 to attain speeds ranging between 1,430km/h at sea level, or Mach=1.16, and 1,930km/h at 12,000m, or Mach=1.8, and an altitude of between 17,500 and 18,000m during its test program. This outstanding performance prompted further development with a view to production as a point defense interceptor.
Similarly powered by R3-26 engines, and embodying major nose redesign with a larger orifice permitting introduction of a substantial two-position conical centerbody for a TsD-30 radar, a further prototype was completed as the SM-12PM. Discarding the wing root NR-30 cannon of preceding prototypes, the SM-12PM was armed with only two K-5M (RS-2U) beam-riding missiles and entered flight test in 1957. This configuration would become the basis for the MiG-19bis interceptor that eventually was ordered into limited production (see below).
However, the SM-12 development line did not stop at this point. At the end of 1958, yet another prototype, the SM-12PMU, joined the experimental fighter family. This had R3M-26 turbojets uprated to 3.800kg with afterburning, but these were further augmented by a U-19D accelerator, which took the form of a permanent ventral pack containing an RU-013 rocket motor and its propellant tanks. Developed by D. D. Sevruk, the RU-013 delivered 3,000kg of additional thrust, and with the aid of this rocket motor, the SM-12PMU attained an altitude of 24,000m and a speed of Mach=1.69. But this effort was to no avail: the decision had been taken meanwhile to manufacture the Ye-7 in series as the MiG-21, and further development of the SM-12 series was therefore discontinued.
Nevertheless, since full operational status of the new MiG-21 was expected to remain pending for some time, production of a modified SM-12PM was ordered as a gap filler. Not only would this fighter bridge the performance gap to the Mach 2-capable MiG-21, it also had the benefit of being based on proven technologies and would not require a new basic pilot training.
The new aircraft received the official designation MiG-19bis. Compared with the SM-12PM prototype, the MiG-19bis differed in some details and improvements. The SM-12PM’s most significant shortfall was its short range – at full power, it had only a range of 750 km! This could be mended through an additional fuel tank in an enlarged dorsal fairing behind the cockpit. With this internal extra fuel, range could be extended by a further 200 - 250km range, but drop tanks had typically to be carried, too, in order to extend the fighter’ combat radius with two AAMs to 500 km. Specifically for the MiG-19bis, new, supersonic drop tanks (PTB-490) were designed, and these were later adapted for the MiG-21, too.
The air intake shock cone was re-contoured and the shifting mechanism improved: Instead of a simple, conical shape, the shock cone now had a more complex curvature with two steps and the intake orifice area was widened to allow a higher airflow rate. The air intake’s efficiency was further optimized through gradual positions of the shock cone.
As a positive side effect, the revised shock cone offered space for an enlarged radar dish, what improved detection range and resolution. The TsD-30 radar for the fighter’s missile-only armament was retained, even though the K-5’s effective range of only 2–6 km (1¼ – 3¾ mi) made it only suitable against slow and large targets like bombers. All guns were deleted in order to save weight or make room for the electronic equipment. The tail section was also changed because the R3M-26 engines and their afterburners were considerably longer than the MiG-19's original RM-5 engines. The exhausts now markedly protruded from the tail section, and the original, characteristic pen nib fairing between the two engines had been modified accordingly.
Production started in 1960, but only a total of roundabout 180 MiG-19bis, which received the NATO code "Farmer F", were built and the Soviet Union remained the only operator of the type. The first aircraft entered Soviet Anti-Air Defense in early 1961, and the machines were concentrated in PVO interceptor units around major sites like Moscow, Sewastopol at the Black Sea and Vladivostok in the Far East.
With the advent of the MiG-21, though, their career did not last long. Even though many machines were updated to carry the K-13 (the IR-guided AA-2 "Atoll") as well as the improved K-55 AAMs, with no change of the type’s designation, most MiG-19bis were already phased out towards the late 1960s and quickly replaced by 2nd generation MiG-21s as well as heavier and more capable Suchoj interceptors like the Su-9, -11 and -15. By 1972, all MiG-19bis had been retired.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 13.54 m (44 ft 4 in), fuselage only with shock cone in forward position
15.48 m (50 8 ½ in) including pitot
Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)
Height: 3.8885 m (12 ft 9 in)
Wing area: 25 m² (269 ft²)
Empty weight: 5,210 kg (11,475 lb)
Loaded weight: 7,890 kg (17,380 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 9,050 kg (19,935 lb)
Fuel capacity: 2,450 l (556 imp gal; 647 US gal) internal;
plus 760 l (170 imp gal; 200 US gal) with 2 drop tanks
Powerplant:
2× Sorokin R3M-26 turbojets, rated at 37.2 kN (8,370 lbf) thrust each with afterburning
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,380km/h at sea level (Mach=1.16)
1,850km/h at 12,000m (Mach=1.8)
Range: 1,250 km (775 mi; 750 nmi) at 14,000 m (45,000 ft) with 2 × 490 l drop tanks
Combat range: 500 km (312 mi; 270 nmi)
Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,242 mi; 690 nmi)
Service ceiling: 19,750 m (64,690 ft)
Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,000 ft/min)
Wing loading: 353.3 kg/m² (72.4 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.86
Armament:
No internal guns.
4× underwing pylons; typically, a pair of PTB-490 drop tanks were carried on the outer pylon pair,
plus a pair of air-to air missiles on the inner pair: initially two radar-guided Kaliningrad K-5M (RS-2US)
AAMs, later two radar-guided K-55 or IR-guided Vympel K-13 (AA-2 'Atoll') AAMs
The kit and its assembly:
Another submission for the 2018 Cold War Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and again the opportunity to build a whiffy model from the project list. But it’s as fictional as one might think, since the SM-12 line of experimental “hybrid” fighters between the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 was real. But none of these aircraft ever made it into serial production, and in real life the MiG-21 showed so much potential that the attempts to improve the MiG-19 were stopped and no operational fighter entered production or service.
However, the SM-12, with its elongated nose and the central shock cone, makes a nice model subject, and I imagined what a service aircraft might have looked like? It would IMHO have been close, if not identical, to the SM-12PM, since this was the most refined pure jet fighter in the development family.
The basis for the build was a (dead cheap) Mastercraft MiG-19, which is a re-edition of the venerable Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) kit – as a tribute to modern tastes, it comes with (crudely) engraved panel, but it has a horrible fit all over. For instance, there was a 1mm gap between the fuselage and the right wing, the wing halves’ outlines did not match at all and it is questionable if the canopy actually belongs to the kit at all? PSR everywhere. I also had a Plastyk version of this kit on the table some time ago, but it was of a much better quality! O.K., the Mastercraft kit comes cheap, but it’s, to be honest, not a real bargain.
Even though the result would not be crisp I did some mods and changes. Internally, a cockpit tub was implanted (OOB there’s just a wacky seat hanging in mid air) plus some serious lead weight in the nose section for a proper stance.
On the outside, the new air intake is the most obvious change. I found a Su-17 intake (from a Mastercraft kit, too) and used a piece from a Matchbox B-17G’s dorsal turret to elongate the nose – it had an almost perfect diameter and a mildly conical shape. Some massive PSR work was necessary to blend the parts together, though.
The tail received new jet nozzles, scratched from steel needle protection covers, and the tail fairing was adjusted according to the real SM-12’s shape.
Ordnance was adapted, too: the drop tanks come from a Mastercraft MiG-21, and these supersonic PTB-490 tanks were indeed carried by the real SM-12 prototypes because the uprated engines were very thirsty and the original, teardrop-shaped MiG-19 tanks simply too draggy for the much faster SM-12. As a side note, the real SM-12’s short range was one of the serious factors that prevented the promising type’s production in real life. In order to overcome the poor range weakness I added an enlarged spine (half of a drop tank), inspired by the MiG-21 SMT, that would house an additional internal fuel tank.
The R2-SU/K-5 AAMs come from a vintage Mastercraft Soviet aircraft weapon set, which carries a pair of these 1st generation AAMs. While the molds seem to be a bit soft, the missiles look pretty convincing. Their pylons were taken from the kit (OOB they carry unguided AAM pods and are placed behind the main landing gear wells), just reversed and placed on the wings’ leading edges – similar to the real SM-12’s arrangement.
Painting and markings:
No surprises. In the Sixties, any PVO aircraft was left in bare metal, so there was hardly an alternative to a NMF finish.
Painting started with an all-over coat with acrylic Revell 99 (Aluminum), just the spine tank became light grey (Revell 371) for some contrast, and I painted some di-electric covers in a deep green (Revell 48).
The cockpit interior was painted with a bright mix of Revell 55 and some 48, while the landing gear wells and the back section of the cockpit were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57).
The landing gear was painted in Steel (unpolished Modelmaster metallizer) and received classic, bright green wheel discs (Humbrol 2). As a small, unusual highlight the pitot boom under the chin received red and white stripes – seen on occasional MiG-19S fighters in Soviet service, and the anti-flutter booms on the stabilizers became bright red, too.
After the basic painting was done the kit received a black ink wash. Once this had dried and wiped off with a soft cotton cloth, post shading with various metallizer tones was added in order to liven up the uniform aircraft (including Humbrol’s matt and polished aluminum, and the exhaust section was treated with steel). Some panel lines were emphasized with a thin pencil.
Decals were puzzled together from various sources, a Guards badge and a few Russian stencils were added, too. Finally, the kit was sealed with a coat of sheen acrylic varnish (a 2:1 mix of Italeri matt and semi-gloss varnish).
The K-5 missiles, last but not least, were painted in aluminum, too, but their end caps (both front and tail section) became off-white.
The Mastercraft kit on which this conversion was based is crude, so I did not have high expectations concerning the outcome. But the new nose blends nicely into the MiG-19 fuselage, and the wide spine is a subtle detail that makes the aircraft look more “beefy” and less MiG-19-ish. The different drop tanks – even though they are authentic – visually add further speed. And despite many flaws, I am quite happy with the result of roundabout a week’s work.
and, by extension...
Extrapolate towards Infinity (good luck with that).
Rumours that they are the same person have never been substantiated.
THE COMPUTER SAYS NO!
AI Overview (Google)
Art Bites: Who Was Marcel Duchamp's Female Alter-Ego?
No, Rrose Sélavy and the Mona Lisa are not the same person. Rrose Sélavy was the female alter ego of artist Marcel Duchamp, who created the persona as part of his exploration of identity and gender. The Mona Lisa, or La Gioconda, is a painting by Leonardo da Vinci that depicts Lisa Gherardini, a Florentine noblewoman, as confirmed by historical notes.
DUH! THINK AGAIN BOTS!
The cute coffeeshop girl said "You belong in Asia!" and told me about Momo, which of course I have already been to.
Owlsford Owl is from Target, so is the cheapstyles skirt.
The peekaboo platforms are from The Garden.
I bought the T at SPACE, it's designed by Paul Hornschmier, indie comic darling.
The layered white shirt was nicked from my mum.
The flowered scarf is from Ohio Thrift.
The navy blazer is a relic from high school cosplay, I think it was rescued from Goodwill.
This entire outfit was extrapolated from my dark blue nail polish.
+++ 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 Char B1 was a French heavy tank manufactured before World War II. It was conceived as a specialized offensive vehicle, armed with a 75 mm howitzer in the hull. Later a 47 mm gun in a turret was added, to allow it to function also as a Char de Bataille, a ‘battle tank’ fighting enemy armour, equipping the armoured divisions of the Infantry Arm. Starting in the early twenties, its development and production were repeatedly delayed, resulting in a vehicle that was both technologically complex and expensive, and already obsolescent when real mass-production of a derived version, the Char B1 "bis", started in the late thirties.
The outer appearance of the Char B1 reflected the fact that development started in the twenties: like the very first tank, the British Mark I tank of World War I, it still had large tracks going around the entire hull and large armour plates protecting the suspension—and like all tanks of that decade it had no welded or cast hull armour. The similarity resulted partly from the fact that the Char B1 was a specialized offensive weapon, a break-through tank optimized for punching a hole into strong defensive entrenchments, so it was designed with good trench-crossing capabilities and therefore the hull and the tracks had considerable length. The French Army thought that dislodging the enemy from a key front sector would decide a campaign, and it prided itself on being the only army in the world having a sufficient number of adequately protected heavy tanks. The exploitation phase of a battle was seen as secondary and best carried out by controlled and methodical movement to ensure superiority in numbers, so that the heavy tank’s mobility was of secondary concern. Although the Char B1 had a reasonably good speed for the time of its conception, no serious efforts were made to improve it when much faster tanks appeared.
More important than the tank's limitations in tactical mobility, however, were its limitations in strategic mobility. The low practical range implied the need to refuel very often, limiting its operational capabilities. This again implied that the armoured divisions of the Infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées, were not very effective as a mobile reserve and thus lacked strategic flexibility. They were not created to fulfill such a role in the first place, which was reflected in the small size of the artillery and infantry components of the divisions.
Another explanation of the similarity to the British Mark I lies in the Char B1's original specification to create a self-propelled gun able to destroy enemy infantry and artillery. The main weapon of the tank was its 75 mm howitzer, and the entire design of the vehicle was directed to making this gun as effective as possible. When in the early 1930s it became obvious that the Char B1 also had to defeat counterattacking enemy armour, it was too late for a complete redesign. The solution was to add the standard cast APX-1 turret which also equipped the Char D2 and the Somua S35. Like most French tanks of the period the Char B thus had a small one-man turret. The commander not only had to command the tank, but also to aim and load the anti-tank gun, and if he was a unit leader, he had to command his other tanks as well. This was in contrast with the contemporary German, British and to a lesser extent Soviet policy to use two or three-man turret crews, in which these duties were divided amongst several men, or to use dedicated command vehicles.
Among the most powerfully armed and armoured tanks of its day, the Char B1 was very effective in direct confrontations with early German armour during the Battle of France. The 60 mm (2.36 in) frontal armor was sloped, giving it an effective strength of near 80 mm (3.15 in), and it proved to be almost invulnerable to the 1940 Panzer II and III as well as the early Panzer IV with its short 75mm close-support gun. There were no real weak spots, and this invulnerability helped the B1 to close on targets, then destroy them with the turret 47 mm (1.85 in) or the brute force of the howitzer HE shells. However, its slow speed and high fuel consumption made it ill-adapted to the war of movement then being fought.
In the meantime, plans had taken shape to improve the Char B1, and this led to two developments that eventually entered the hardware stage: A further up-armoured version, the Char B1 "ter", was designed with sloped and welded 70 mm armour, weighing 36.6 tonnes and powered by a 350 hp (260 kW) engine. It was meant to replace the B1 bis to accelerate mass production, a change first intended for the summer of 1940 but later postponed to March 1941 and finally abandoned.
In the course of the redesign, space was provided for a fifth crew member, a "mechanic". Cost was reduced by omitting the complex Neader transmission for aiming the howitzer and giving the hull gun a traverse of five degrees to each side instead. The first prototype was shown in 1937, but only three prototypes could be partly finished before the defeat of France. Serial production was rejected due to the need to build totally new production lines for the much-modified Char B1 ter, so that this development was a dead end, even more so because it did not really cure the vehicle’s weakness of the overburdened commander and the split armament.
The latter issues were addressed with another development, a modernized variant of the existing Char B1 bis with a new weapon layout, the Char B1 “tetre”. Work on this variant started in 1936, as an alternative concept to the one-man turret and as an experimental carrier for a new high velocity semi-automatic 75 mm multi-purpose gun with a long barrel. Such a weapon was direly needed, because the biggest caliber of an anti-tank gun was a mere 47 mm, the SA 35 gun. The only recent alternative was the infantry’s 47 mm APX anti-tank gun from 1937, which could pierce 60 mm (2.4 in) at 550 meters (600 yd) or 80 mm (3.1 in) at 180 meters (200 yd), but it had not been adapted to vehicle use yet and was not regarded to be powerful enough to cope with tanks like the Char B1 itself.
This new 75 mm tank gun was already under development at the Atelier de Construction de Rueil (ARL) for a new medium 20-ton-tank, the Char G1 from Renault, that was to replace the Char B1. The gun, called “ARL 37”, would be mounted in a new three-man turret, and ARL was developing prototypes of both a turret that could be taken by the Char B1’s and S35’s limited turret ring, as well as the gun itself, which was based on the 75 mm high velocity gun with hydro-pneumatic recoil compensation from the vintage heavy FCM 2C tank
The ARL 37 had a mass of 750 kg (1,653.5 lb) and a barrel length of 3,281 mm (129.2 in) with a bore of 43 calibers. Maximum muzzle velocity was 740 m/s (2,400 ft/s). The gun was fitted with an electric firing mechanism and the breech operated semi-automatically. Only one-piece ammunition was used, and both HE and AP rounds could be fired – even though the latter had to developed, too, because no such round was available in 1937/38 yet. However, with early experimental Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap (APCBC) rounds, the ARL 37 was able to penetrate 133 mm (5.2 in) of vertical steel plate at 100 m range, 107 mm (4.2 in) at 1.000 m and still 85 mm (3.3 in) at 2.000 m, making it a powerful anti-tank weapon of its era.
Since the new weapon was expected to fire both HE and AP rounds, the Char B1’s howitzer in the hull was omitted, its opening faired over and instead a movable 7.5 mm Reibel machine gun was added in a ball mount, operated by a radio operator who sat next to the driver. Another 7.5mm machine gun was mounted co-axially to the main gun in the turret, which had a cupola and offered space for the rest of the crew: a dedicated commander as well as a gunner and loader team.
The hexagonal turret was cast and had a welded roof as well as a gun mantlet. With its 70 mm frontal armor as well as the tank’s new hull front section, the conversions added a total of four net tons of weight, so that the Char B1 tetre weighed 36 tons. To prevent its performance from deteriorating further, it received the Char B1 ter’s uprated 350 hp (260 kW) engine. The running gear remained unchanged, even though the fully rotating turret made the complex and expensive Neader transmission superfluous, so that it was replaced by a standard heavy-duty piece.
Although promising, the Char B1 tetre’s development was slow, delayed by the lack of resources and many teething troubles with the new 75 mm cannon and the turret. When the war broke out in September 1939, production was cleared and began slowly, but focus remained on existing vehicles and weapons. By the time there were perhaps 180 operational B1 and B1 bis in all. They were used for the Sarre offensive, a short-lived burst without serious opposition, with a massive force of 41 divisions and 2.400 tanks. The Char B1 served with the armoured divisions of the infantry, the Divisions Cuirassées (DCr). The First and Second DCR had 69 Char B1s each, the Third 68. These were highly specialized offensive units, to break through fortified positions. The mobile phase of a battle was to be carried out by the Divisions Légères Mécaniques (mechanised light divisions) of the cavalry, equipped with the SOMUA S35.
After the German invasion several ad hoc units were formed: the 4e DCr with 52 Char B1s and five autonomous companies (347e, 348e, 349e, 352e and 353e Compagnie Autonome de Chars) with in total 56 tanks: 12 B1s and 44 B1 bis; 28e BCC was reconstituted with 34 tanks. By that time, a very limited number of Char B1 tetre had been produced and delivered to operational units, but their tactical value was low since sufficient 75 mm AP rounds were not available – the tanks had to use primarily the same HE rounds that were fired with the Char B1’s howitzer, and these posed only a limited threat to German tanks, esp. the upgraded Panzer III and IVs. The Char B1 tertre’s potential was never fully exploited, even though most of the tanks were used as command vehicles.
The regular French divisions destroyed quite a few German tanks but lacked enough organic infantry and artillery to function as an effective mobile reserve. After the defeat of France, captured Char B1 of all variants would be used by Germany, with some rebuilt as flamethrowers, Munitionspanzer, or mechanized artillery.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (driver, radio operator/machine gunner, commander, gunner, loader)
Weight: 36 tonnes (40 short tons, 35 long tons)
Length: 6.98 m (22 ft 10½ in) overall with gun forward
6.37 m (20 ft 11 in) hull only
Width: 2.46 m (8 ft 1 in)
Height: 2.84 m (9 ft 3¾ in)
Ground clearance: 40 cm (1 ft 3¾ in)
Climbing: 93 cm (3 ft ½ in)
Trench crossing: 2,4 m (7 ft 10½ in)
Suspension: Bogies with a mixture of vertical coil and leaf springs
Steering: Double differential
Fuel capacity: 400 liters
Armour:
14 to 70 mm (0.55 to 2.75 in)
Performance:
28 km/h (17 mph) on road
21 km/h (13 mph) off-road
Operational range: 200 km (124 mi) on road
Power/weight: 9.7 hp/ton
Engine:
1× Renault inline 6 cylinder 16.5 litre petrol engine with 350 hp (260 kW)
Transmission:
5 forward and 1 rear gear
Armament:
1x 75 ARL 37 high-velocity cannon with 94 rounds
2x 7.5 mm (0.295 in) Reibel machine guns with a total of 5,250 rounds
The kit and its assembly:.
This fictional Char B1 variant was based on the question what the tank could have looked like if there had been a suitable 75 mm gun available that could replace both its howitzer in the hull and the rather light anti-tank gun in the turret? No such weapon existed in France, but I tried to extrapolate the concept based on the standard Char B1 hull.
Two big changes were made: the first concerned the hull howitzer, which was deleted, and its recessed opening faired over with 1 mm styrene sheet and putty. This sound easier as it turned out to be because the suspension for the front right idler wheel had to be retained, and the complex shape of the glacis plate and the opening called for patchwork. A fairing for the co-driver was added as well as a ball mount for the new hull machine gun. New shackles were added to the lower front and, finally, new rows of bolt heads (created with white glue).
The turret was completely replaced with a cast turret from a 1943 T-34/76 (Zvezda kit). While its shape and gun mantlet are quite characteristic, I still used it mostly OOB because its size and shape turned out to be a very good match to contemporary French tank turrets. However, the gun barrel was moved and a fairing for a hydro-pneumatic recoil damper was added, as well as a French commander cupola. And an adapter had to be scratched to attach the new turret to the hull, together with small fairings for the wider turret ring.
Painting and markings:
I wanted a rather unusual paint scheme for this Char B1 derivative, and found inspiration in an operational museum tank that depicts vehicle “311/Rhin”: it carries a three-tone livery in two greens and brown, instead of the more common sand, dark green and earth brown tones or just two-tone schemes.
The colors were adapted to an irregular pattern, and the paints I used were Humbrol 120 (FS 34227, a rather pale interpretation of the tone), 10 (Gloss Dark Brown) and ModelMaster 1764 (FS 34092). As a personal twist, the colors were edged in black, enhancing the contrast.
The markings were puzzled together from various sources in an attempt to create suitable tactical codes of the early 1940 era. The “Ace of Spades” emblem on the turret is, for example, are a marking of the 1st section. The dot in front of the “K” probably indicated a command vehicle, but I am not certain.
Some post-shading was done as well as dry-brushing with light earth brown to emphasize edges and details. Then the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and received some dusting with grey-brown artist pigments, simulating dust around the running gear.
Well, not too much was changed, but the new, bigger turret changes the Char B1’s look considerably – it looks somewhat smaller now? Its new silhouette also reminds me of a duck? Weird, but the conversion worked out well – esp. the modified glacis plate without the howitzer’s recessed opening looks very natural.
Copyright - All Rights Reserved - Black Diamond Images
More Norfolk Island Galleries HERE
The name Slaughter in this case apparently came from the Anglo-Saxon words "slough" meaning wet land and "slohtre" a muddy place or from the name of their Norman landowners – the d’Schlotre family. In my research I saw that an extrapolation of "slohtre" may have led to "slow moving steam" as an alternative meaning. The Cotswold villages of Lower and Upper Slaughter in Goucestershire have a slow moving stream, The River Eye, passing through them.
I don't think anything necessarily horrific happened here to generate that name despite Norfolk Island's acknowledged harsh Penal Colony origins. The HMS Sirius was wrecked on the reef just outside Slaughter Bay in 1790 but without loss of life.
The area of Slaughter Bay was quarried under the water for limestone which was used in Buildings around Kingston and in particular St Barnabas Church.
Today it is an idyllic and safe snorkelling location.
Wandering around University of Toronto, a bit miffed because my planned shots were thwarted by the Pan Am Games closures, I came across this war memorial.
From the University of St. Michael's College web site:
Over 3401 St. Michael’s Alumni served in the military in the ‘Great War’; 32 died in the line of duty. These numbers may not seem remarkable until one reads the ‘Honour Roll’ in the SMC Year Book of 1918. It is there that Fr. Michael J. Oliver, CSB, 1T0 (BA), teacher and administrator of the high school, and Secretary of the ‘Honour Roll’ tells us some rather astonishing figures. From the school’s inception in 1852, the student body was relatively small, usually numbering 100 to 150 in total. Fr. Oliver states, “only recently, (1910?) owing to an increase in the number of Toronto students, has the number exceeded 200” – now remember this was written in 1918, so even if we extrapolate growth we probably would not exceed 225-235.
As well, again quoting Fr. Oliver, “St. Michael’s students/graduates were to a great extent prevented from enlisting by reason of their ‘office’. This affected only college students who, as priests and theological students, had taken ‘orders’. Yet Fr. Oliver says, “we have no hesitation in saying that the following list is not more than half the full number because no organized effort was made to make the list complete.”
We must also bear in mind another major fact – up until probably 1900-1910 the student body had significant numbers of Americans. Fr. Oliver says, “In 1905, 30% were from the U.S.; in 1895, 50% and prior to that even a larger number”.
It is important here to note therefore, volunteers to the U.S. military are, in the main, not included in the data presented. It was on 2nd February 1917, that President Woodrow Wilson severed diplomatic relations with Germany et al. Subsequently, when the Germans promised aid to Mexico should the Mexicans attack the United States (and British intelligence ensured that the Americans would see this), President Wilson and the U.S. Congress declared war on the 7th April 1917. We shall come back to this matter further on.
No form of remembrance for the fallen was provided, until in 1945, St. Michael’s and the Basilian Fathers decided to erect a memorial to all Alumni killed in the Great War. Time passed, but nothing really happened for nearly 40 years. In 1921, The University of Toronto published a Roll of Service 1914-1918 and a ‘Roll of Honour’ for those ‘Killed in Action’ or ‘Died in Service’, but this only encompassed those enrolled in University / College – our High School volunteers and those who died in service received no equal remembrance. As well, Hart House Soldiers Tower on the University campus created its ‘Memorial Archway’ where the names of the known dead from all colleges and faculties are enshrined. (Newman Chapel [St. Thomas Aquinas] also has a small remembrance plaque).
However, in late 1985 Fr. William H. O’Brien CSB, 4T3; Lieutenant (Rt’d) Royal Canadian Artillery, decided that such a remembrance had to come to fruition (See Appendix ‘A’). He became the moving spirit that culminated in the memorial carved into the stone of the ‘slype’ between More and Fisher Houses and dedicated to the memory of the 32 alumni of both College and High School who died. It was completed in the November 1988 in time for the Remembrance Day service on 11 November.
Subsequently, Fr. Bill, who in retirement had become the archivist at St. Michael’s College School, had a similar ‘Remembrance Wall’ put in place on the outside west wall of the College School chapel. It was dedicated in 2000, a year and a half after his death.
St. Michael's College Memorial to the Fallen
If you were to travel to Northern France and Belgium you would find the many memorials in the hundreds of cemeteries that dot the countryside. They hold the graves of most of the more than 66,655 Canadians who never returned from the ‘Great War’ - with close to a third resting in unidentified or unknown graves. The names of those known are cut into their headstones; others show ‘A Soldier of the Great War’ above the cross, and below ‘Known Unto God’. All with no known graves have their names incised in the newly refurbished main memorial at Vimy Ridge (approx 19,000+). As well, there are many war dead, including Canadian, who are buried in multicultural, local church cemeteries and cemeteries of many other mid and northern European countries.
According to Wikipedia, "the term slype is a variant of slip in the sense of a narrow passage; in architecture, the name for the covered passage usually found in monasteries or cathedrals between the transept and the chapter house". Learn something every day.
This High Dynamic Range 360° panorama was stitched from 162 bracketed photographs with PTGUI Pro, tone-mapped with Photomatix, processed with Color Efex, then touched up in Aperture.
Original size: 20000 × 10000 (200.0 MP; 1.04 GB).
Location: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TYPE HISTORY
When it flew its Model 367-80 ‘Dash 80’ prototype for the first time on July 15, 1954, Boeing hoped the aircraft would take the airlines by storm. Extrapolating technology used on the B-47 and B-52 jet bombers, the aircraft represented a quantum leap directly into the jet age compared to the company’s piston-engined Model 367 Stratocruiser. With its swept wing and fourjet powerplant, carried in discrete underwing nacelles, the Dash 80 was the most modern commercial transport available.
Yet the airlines were left unimpressed and it was the US Air Force, realising it needed a jet tanker to support its jet bombers, that saw the Dash 80 into production. In September 1955 it ordered its first KC-135A Stratotanker, Boeing modifying the Dash 80 to trial a ‘flying boom’ refuelling system. The Stratotanker entered service on June 28, 1957 and Boeing continued development along this military line under the company designation Model 717.
The airlines had been unimpressed by the Dash 80’s cabin width, which was too narrow for six-abreast seating, and Boeing therefore returned to the Dash 80 concept, widening the cabin and developing a series of successful airliners as the Model 707.
Boeing built 732 KC-135s in different variants, many of them ultimately re-engined with the modern CFM56 turbofan, known as the F108 in military service. These aircraft are designated KC-135R. There was also a line of C-135 transports, EC-135 command posts, RC-135 intelligence gatherers and a host of other variants, with the KC and RC remaining in widespread service.
Developed under Boeing’s Model 739 series, the first of a long line of RC-135 variants was ordered in 1962. This photographic reconnaissance RC-135A entered service during the mid-1960s, followed by the first of the electronic intelligence gatherers, the RC-135B. The precedent for modifying KC airframes to RC standard was set in 1972, with the conversion of three KC-135As as RC-135Ds for the Rivet Brass mission. All subsequent RC variants were produced by conversion/upgrade, mostly from C, KC and RC standards, culminating in the RC-135V and RC-135W, operated under the Rivet Joint codename that has become internationally, and officially recognised in USAF parlance, as the type’s name.
In June 2011, 51 Sqn flew the final BAe Nimrod R.Mk 1 sortie of its 37-year association with the type. Plans were under way for the aircraft’s replacement under a project known as Airseeker, which had begun the previous March. It envisaged the acquisition of three RC-135W Rivet Joint aircraft for delivery from 2013. The machines were to be converted from USAF KC-135R airframes and L-3 Communications in Greenville, Texas was chosen to perform the work as the USAF’s experienced Rivet Joint contractor. The work began in March 2011.
On November 12, 2013, No. 51 Sqn took delivery of the UK’s first Rivet Joint, operating its maiden operational sortie on May 23, 2014. The second aircraft arrived in August 2015 and the third on June 8, 2017. For the purposes of sensor and system upgrades, the trio are considered an extension of the USAF Rivet Joint fleet, ensuring they remain at the cutting edge of capability.
Rivet Joint has been deployed extensively for Operation Shader and on other operational taskings. It had been formally named Airseeker, but is almost universally known in service as the RC-135W Rivet Joint.
Aquest va ser un sopar a Maitea preparat expressament per a un grup de 17 persones en el qual ens van servir diferents plats a compartir, que vam acompanyar de vins aportats pels propis comensals. Una experiència atípica i una mica moguda (un nombrós grup de malalts del vi comporta un tràfec constant d'ampolles i un important desplegament de copes damunt de la taula) que no és extrapolable a anar-hi en pla més discret i privat però que ens va permetre avançar algunes conclusions sobre un lloc en el qual no havíem estat mai abans.
Aquest popular establiment sol estar sempre "petat" i en conseqüència l'ambient sol ser agitat i un tant sorollós. Però sense problemes; això no és un restaurant a l'ús sinó una taverna, i com a tal es dóna per assumit el bullici, així com l'absència d'estovalles, que els tovallons siguin de paper i la incomoditat d'unes cadires sense respatller.
Després de gaudir de debò amb plats que ens van anar arribant sobre la taula, donem fe de que en aquesta casa juguen amb producte de qualitat, saben molt bé el que es fan i els resultats son realment molt bons. A més, disposen d'un bon assortiment de vins i entenen de vins. Nico, un dels responsables del lloc, a més d'atendre'ns de la millor manera possible, se'ns va revelar com un apassionat i gran coneixedor del món del vi. Dos importants punts (teca i mam) ben resolts en aquesta cèntrica taverna, que probablement siguin la causa del seu èxit popular.
En fi, el bon rotllo, el bon menjar, els bons vins i un tracte atent i implicat van ser la tònica d'una vetllada llarga, divertida i molt especial en un lloc tremendament informal però que ens va semblar solvent i de qualitat i al què pensem tornar repetidament i de forma més tranquil·la.
El millor: la qualitat de la seva oferta sòlida i el bon coneixement sobre vins; que estigui obert tots els dies i ininterrompudament tota la tarda
El pitjor: potser el soroll i la incomoditat pròpies d'una taverna
Recomanat: millor accedir evitant les hores punta
Satisfacció: @@@+
Casanova, 155
08036 Barcelona
Telèfon: 93 439 51 07 / 93 321 97 90
Cuina ininterrompuda des del migdia fins mitjanit, de dilluns a dissabte. Vacances dues setmanes de l'Agost.
Subtitled: "A Rationalization and Extrapolation Of The Split-Level Continuum."
From the back cover:
"HANK HAD A FEELING HE WASN'T IN KANSAS ANYMORE . . . Hank Stover was one of two people in the world who knew that Oz really existed, but he never expected to go there. He never expected his plane would be forced down by a green cloud that April day in 1923. Nor that he would meet the witch who had befriended his mother. Nor that she would be so beautiful . . ."
All Saints Church, also known as Lydd Church or The Cathedral on the Marsh, is a church in Lydd, Kent, South East England. It belongs to the Diocese of Canterbury. All Saints is the longest parish church in Kent at 199 feet (61 m), and also has one of the tallest towers in the county at 132 feet (40 m). The church is thought to incorporate a small Romano-British basilica possibly built in the 5th century, though most of the current fabric is medieval. It was associated with local fraternities or guilds in the 15th century and could seat 1,000 people at a time. Severely damaged by World War II bombing, the church was subsequently restored and is now a Grade I listed building.
The church was long thought to be Saxon in origin, but recent studies have dated the oldest section to the latter half of the 5th century, making it Romano-British. It appears to incorporate a very small basilica which had an apse, an arcade on the north side of three bays, and an elaborate porch on the west side. This is considerably different to Anglo-Saxon churches, leading to a Romano-British attribution.
In the fifteenth century, a number of Fraternities or Guilds of lay parishioners were connected with the church. Each of these fraternities held services in a different part of the church, either at a special altar of its patron saint, or before the image of that saint; and each fraternity maintained a light before the altar, or image of its patron. In the fifteenth century, the Fraternities were those of the Holy Trinity, All Saints, St. James, St. Peter, St. Mary, St. Katherine, St. John the Baptist, and St. George. In the following century, St. Barbara, St. Anthony, St. Mildred, and St. Nicholas were added.The church registers for christenings and marriages began in 1542 and for burials in 1539.
The church interior was restored in the 18th century when box pews were replaced with oak pews to give a seating capacity of 1,000. The church was extensively damaged during World War II; in 1940 the chancel was destroyed by a stray bomb; being re-built after the war in the early English style and removing the Victorian 'restoration' of the east end.Rectors include Thomas Wolsey (who later became Cardinal) though it is doubtful that he ever attended, as he held a number of churches in plurality, employing a curate and keeping the tithes for himself.
The church became a Grade I listed building on 28 November 1950.
All Saints is the longest parish church in Kent at 199 feet (61 m). The stone church is built in three styles, Early English, Decorated, and Perpendicular.[9] The church, built of ragstone rubble with a tiled roof, received pews and a new roof over the nave during the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III.The west tower, at 132 feet, is one of the tallest in Kent, with a fine ring of eight bells. This tower is dated to between 1435 and 1450 and is crenellated with 4 crockets.The roof of the nave contains moulded and battlemented tie-beams, ornamental bracket-shaped wall-pieces, moulded wall plates, octagonal king posts.
There was a chapel dedicated to St Mary, an altar and a chapel of St. John the Baptist, in one of the side chancels; there were altars dedicated to St Peter, the Holy Trinity, and St James. A window depicting the Seven Sacraments was bequeathed in 1476 by John Seawlys.
A collection of 17 brasses are commonly kept from view, by the nave carpet. Within the church, the ancient family of Godfrey of Lydd are represented by a brass in the 13th century nave which has the date 1430 upon it, and a bust set in the north wall of the chancel. Descendants of this family are to be found on a World War II memorial. The church was adorned with paintings, and writings provided by churchwarden John Marketman in 1611. Around 1428, new organs were purchased, which were repaired 26 years later. The church contains a 16th century memorial to Thomas Godfrey and an effigy of Sir Walter de Meryl, Lord of the Manor of Jacques Court. Also of note is a roundel carved in marble by John Raxman, dedicated to Anne Russell and her son.
The earliest existing tomb in the churchyard belongs to the Strugell family and dates from 1551. Extrapolating from the work of the late Mr. Leland Duncan, "The Monumental Inscriptions in Lydd Church and Churchyard", it is evident that a large number of sailors rest in the parish churchyard, all victims of the stormy seas along this dangerous coast. Of these, six were drowned with the wreck of the "Northfleet" in January 1873, and Tom Edgar who was with Captain Cook in 1779. The tower overlooks an old holm oak, on top of which rest heron nests.
The Quran (English pronunciation: /kɔrˈɑːn/ kor-AHN , Arabic: القرآن al-qur'ān, IPA: [qurˈʔaːn], literally meaning "the recitation", also romanised Qur'an or Koran) is the central religious text of Islam, which Muslims believe to be a revelation from God (Arabic: الله, Allah). Its scriptural status among a world-spanning religious community, and its major place within world literature generally, has led to a great deal of secondary literature on the Quran. Quranic chapters are called suras and verses are called ayahs.
Muslims believe that the Quran was verbally revealed by God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel (Jibril), gradually over a period of approximately 23 years, beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632 CE, the year of his death. Muslims regard the Quran as the most important miracle of Muhammad, a proof of his prophethood, and the culmination of a series of divine messages that started with the messages revealed to Adam and ended with Muhammad. They consider the Quran to be the only revealed book that has been protected by God from distortion or corruption.
According to the traditional narrative, several companions of Muhammad served as scribes and were responsible for writing down the revelations. Shortly after Muhammad's death, the Quran was compiled by his companions who wrote down and memorized parts of it. These codices had differences that motivated the Caliph Uthman to establish a standard version now known as Uthman's codex, which is generally considered the archetype of the Quran we have today. However, the existence of variant readings, with mostly minor and some significant variations, and the early unvocalized Arabic script mean the relationship between Uthman's codex to both the text of today's Quran and to the revelations of Muhammad's time is still unclear.
The Quran assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in the Jewish and Christian scriptures. It summarizes some, dwells at length on others and, in some cases, presents alternative accounts and interpretations of events. The Quran describes itself as a book of guidance. It sometimes offers detailed accounts of specific historical events, and it often emphasizes the moral significance of an event over its narrative sequence. The Quran is used along with the hadith to interpret sharia law. During prayers, the Quran is recited only in Arabic.
Someone who has memorized the entire Quran is called a hafiz. Some Muslims read Quranic ayahs (verses) with elocution, which is often called tajwīd. During the month of Ramadan, Muslims typically complete the recitation of the whole Quran during tarawih prayers. In order to extrapolate the meaning of a particular Quranic verse, most Muslims rely on the tafsir.
ETYMOLOGY & MEANING
The word qurʼān appears about 70 times in the Quran itself, assuming various meanings. It is a verbal noun (maṣdar) of the Arabic verb qaraʼa (قرأ), meaning "he read" or "he recited". The Syriac equivalent is (ܩܪܝܢܐ) qeryānā, which refers to "scripture reading" or "lesson". While some Western scholars consider the word to be derived from the Syriac, the majority of Muslim authorities hold the origin of the word is qaraʼa itself. Regardless, it had become an Arabic term by Muhammad's lifetime. An important meaning of the word is the "act of reciting", as reflected in an early Quranic passage: "It is for Us to collect it and to recite it (qurʼānahu)."
In other verses, the word refers to "an individual passage recited [by Muhammad]". Its liturgical context is seen in a number of passages, for example: "So when al-qurʼān is recited, listen to it and keep silent." The word may also assume the meaning of a codified scripture when mentioned with other scriptures such as the Torah and Gospel.
The term also has closely related synonyms that are employed throughout the Quran. Each synonym possesses its own distinct meaning, but its use may converge with that of qurʼān in certain contexts. Such terms include kitāb (book); āyah (sign); and sūrah (scripture). The latter two terms also denote units of revelation. In the large majority of contexts, usually with a definite article (al-), the word is referred to as the "revelation" (waḥy), that which has been "sent down" (tanzīl) at intervals. Other related words are: dhikr (remembrance), used to refer to the Quran in the sense of a reminder and warning, and ḥikmah (wisdom), sometimes referring to the revelation or part of it.
The Quran describes itself as "the discernment or the criterion between truth and falsehood" (al-furqān), "the mother book" (umm al-kitāb), "the guide" (huda), "the wisdom" (hikmah), "the remembrance" (dhikr) and "the revelation" (tanzīl; something sent down, signifying the descent of an object from a higher place to lower place). Another term is al-kitāb (the book), though it is also used in the Arabic language for other scriptures, such as the Torah and the Gospels. The adjective of "Quran" has multiple transliterations including "quranic," "koranic" and "qur'anic," or capitalised as "Qur'anic," "Koranic" and "Quranic." The term muṣḥaf ('written work') is often used to refer to particular Quranic manuscripts but is also used in the Quran to identify earlier revealed books. Other transliterations of "Quran" include "al-Coran", "Coran", "Kuran" and "al-Qurʼan".
HISTORY
PROPHETIC ERA
Islamic tradition relates that Muhammad received his first revelation in the Cave of Hira during one of his isolated retreats to the mountains. Thereafter, he received revelations over a period of 23 years. According to hadith and Muslim history, after Muhammad emigrated to Medina and formed an independent Muslim community, he ordered many of his companions to recite the Quran and to learn and teach the laws, which were revealed daily. It is related that some of the Quraish who were taken prisoners at the battle of Badr regained their freedom after they had taught some of the Muslims the simple writing of the time. Thus a group of Muslims gradually became literate. As it was initially spoken, the Quran was recorded on tablets, bones, and the wide, flat ends of date palm fronds. Most suras were in use amongst early Muslims since they are mentioned in numerous sayings by both Sunni and Shia sources, relating Muhammad's use of the Quran as a call to Islam, the making of prayer and the manner of recitation. However, the Quran did not exist in book form at the time of Muhammad's death in 632 CE. There is agreement among scholars that Muhammad himself did not write down the revelation.
Sahih al-Bukhari narrates Muhammad describing the revelations as, "Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell" and Aisha reported, "I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over)." Muhammad's first revelation, according to the Quran, was accompanied with a vision. The agent of revelation is mentioned as the "one mighty in power", the one who "grew clear to view when he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nigh and came down till he was (distant) two bows' length or even nearer." The Islamic studies scholar Welch states in the Encyclopaedia of Islam that he believes the graphic descriptions of Muhammad's condition at these moments may be regarded as genuine, because he was severely disturbed after these revelations. According to Welch, these seizures would have been seen by those around him as convincing evidence for the superhuman origin of Muhammad's inspirations. However, Muhammad's critics accused him of being a possessed man, a soothsayer or a magician since his experiences were similar to those claimed by such figures well known in ancient Arabia. Welch additionally states that it remains uncertain whether these experiences occurred before or after Muhammad's initial claim of prophethood. The Quran describes Muhammad as "ummi", which is traditionally interpreted as "illiterate," but the meaning is rather more complex. The medieval commentators such as Al-Tabari maintained that the term induced two meanings: first, the inability to read or write in general; second, the inexperience or ignorance of the previous books or scriptures (but they gave priority to the first meaning). Besides, Muhammad's illiteracy was taken as a sign of the genuineness of his prophethood. For example, according to Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, if Muhammad had mastered writing and reading he possibly would have been suspected of having studied the books of the ancestors. Some scholars such as Watt prefer the second meaning.
COMPILATION
Based on earlier transmitted reports, in the year 632 CE, after Muhammad died and a number of his companions who knew the Quran by heart were killed in a battle by Musaylimah, the first caliph Abu Bakr (d. 634CE) decided to collect the book in one volume so that it could be preserved. Zayd ibn Thabit (d. 655CE) was the person to collect the Quran since "he used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle". Thus, a group of scribes, most importantly Zayd, collected the verses and produced a hand-written manuscript of the complete book. The manuscript according to Zayd remained with Abu Bakr until he died. Zayd's reaction to the task and the difficulties in collecting the Quranic material from parchments, palm-leaf stalks, thin stones and from men who knew it by heart is recorded in earlier narratives. After Abu Bakr, Hafsa bint Umar, Muhammad's widow, was entrusted with the manuscript. In about 650 CE, the third Caliph Uthman ibn Affan (d. 656CE) began noticing slight differences in pronunciation of the Quran as Islam expanded beyond the Arabian peninsula into Persia, the Levant, and North Africa. In order to preserve the sanctity of the text, he ordered a committee headed by Zayd to use Abu Bakr's copy and prepare a standard copy of the Quran. Thus, within 20 years of Muhammad's death, the Quran was committed to written form. That text became the model from which copies were made and promulgated throughout the urban centers of the Muslim world, and other versions are believed to have been destroyed. The present form of the Quran text is accepted by Muslim scholars to be the original version compiled by Abu Bakr.
According to Shia and some Sunni scholars, Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661CE) compiled a complete version of the Quran shortly after Muhammad's death. The order of this text differed from that gathered later during Uthman's era in that this version had been collected in chronological order. Despite this, he made no objection against the standardized Quran and accepted the Quran in circulation. Other personal copies of the Quran might have existed including Ibn Mas'ud's and Ubayy ibn Kab's codex, none of which exist today.
The Quran most likely existed in scattered written form during Muhammad's lifetime. Several sources indicate that during Muhammad's lifetime a large number of his companions had memorized the revelations. Early commentaries and Islamic historical sources support the above-mentioned understanding of the Quran's early development. The Quran in its present form is generally considered by academic scholars to record the words spoken by Muhammad because the search for variants has not yielded any differences of great significance. Although most variant readings of the text of the Quran have ceased to be transmitted, some still are. There has been no critical text produced on which a scholarly reconstruction of the Quranic text could be based. Historically, controversy over the Quran's content has rarely become an issue, although debates continue on the subject.
In 1972, in a mosque in the city of Sana'a, Yemen, manuscripts were discovered that were later proved to be the most ancient Quranic text known to exist. The Sana'a manuscripts contain palimpsests, a manuscript page from which the text has been washed off to make the parchment reusable again - a practice which was common in ancient times due to scarcity of writing material. However, the faint washed-off underlying text (scriptio inferior) is still barely visible and believed to be "pre-Uthmanic" Quranic content, while the text written on top (scriptio superior) is believed to belong to Uthmanic time. Studies using radiocarbon dating indicate that the parchments are dated to the period before 671 AD with a 99 percent probability.
SIGNIFICANCE IN ISLAM
WORSHIP
Muslims believe the Quran to be the book of divine guidance revealed from God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel over a period of 23 years and view the Quran as God's final revelation to humanity. They also believe that the Quran has solutions to all the problems of humanity irrespective of how complex they may be and in what age they occur.
Revelation in Islamic and Quranic concept means the act of God addressing an individual, conveying a message for a greater number of recipients. The process by which the divine message comes to the heart of a messenger of God is tanzil (to send down) or nuzūl (to come down). As the Quran says, "With the truth we (God) have sent it down and with the truth it has come down."
The Quran frequently asserts in its text that it is divinely ordained. Some verses in the Quran seem to imply that even those who do not speak Arabic would understand the Quran if it were recited to them. The Quran refers to a written pre-text, "the preserved tablet", that records God's speech even before it was sent down.
The issue of whether the Quran is eternal or created became a theological debate (Quran's createdness) in the ninth century. Mu'tazilas, an Islamic school of theology based on reason and rational thought, held that the Quran was created while the most widespread varieties of Muslim theologians considered the Quran to be co-eternal with God and therefore uncreated. Sufi philosophers view the question as artificial or wrongly framed.
Muslims believe that the present wording of the Quran corresponds to that revealed to Muhammad, and according to their interpretation of Quran 15:9, it is protected from corruption ("Indeed, it is We who sent down the Quran and indeed, We will be its guardian."). Muslims consider the Quran to be a guide, a sign of the prophethood of Muhammad and the truth of the religion. They argue it is not possible for a human to produce a book like the Quran, as the Quran itself maintains.
Muslims commemorate annually the beginning of Quran's revelation on the Night of Destiny (Laylat al-Qadr), during the last 10 days of Ramadan, the month during which they fast from sunrise until sunset.
The first sura of the Quran is repeated in daily prayers and in other occasions. This sura, which consists of seven verses, is the most often recited sura of the Quran:
"All praise belongs to God, Lord of the Universe, the Beneficent, the Merciful and Master of the Day of Judgment, You alone We do worship and from You alone we do seek assistance, guide us to the right path, the path of those to whom You have granted blessings, those who are neither subject to Your anger nor have gone astray."
Respect for the written text of the Quran is an important element of religious faith by many Muslims, and the Quran is treated with reverence. Based on tradition and a literal interpretation of Quran 56:79 ("none shall touch but those who are clean"), some Muslims believe that they must perform a ritual cleansing with water before touching a copy of the Quran, although this view is not universal. Worn-out copies of the Quran are wrapped in a cloth and stored indefinitely in a safe place, buried in a mosque or a Muslim cemetery, or burned and the ashes buried or scattered over water.
In Islam, most intellectual disciplines, including Islamic theology, philosophy, mysticism and Jurisprudence, have been concerned with the Quran or have their foundation in its teachings. Muslims believe that the preaching or reading of the Quran is rewarded with divine rewards variously called ajr, thawab or hasanat.
IN ISLAMIC ART
The Quran also inspired Islamic arts and specifically the so-called Quranic arts of calligraphy and illumination.[1] The Quran is never decorated with figurative images, but many Qurans have been highly decorated with decorative patterns in the margins of the page, or between the lines or at the start of suras. Islamic verses appear in many other media, on buildings and on objects of all sizes, such as mosque lamps, metal work, pottery and single pages of calligraphy for muraqqas or albums.
INIMITABILITY
Inimitability of the Quran (or "I'jaz") is the belief that no human speech can match the Quran in its content and form. The Quran is considered an inimitable miracle by Muslims, effective until the Day of Resurrection - and, thereby, the central proof granted to Muhammad in authentication of his prophetic status. The concept of inimitability originates in the Quran where in five different verses opponents are challenged to produce something like the Quran: "If men and sprites banded together to produce the like of this Quran they would never produce its like not though they backed one another."[61] So the suggestion is that if there are doubts concerning the divine authorship of the Quran, come forward and create something like it. From the ninth century, numerous works appeared which studied the Quran and examined its style and content. Medieval Muslim scholars including al-Jurjani (d. 1078CE) and al-Baqillani (d. 1013CE) have written treatises on the subject, discussed its various aspects, and used linguistic approaches to study the Quran. Others argue that the Quran contains noble ideas, has inner meanings, maintained its freshness through the ages and has caused great transformations in individual level and in the history. Some scholars state that the Quran contains scientific information that agrees with modern science. The doctrine of miraculousness of the Quran is further emphasized by Muhammad's illiteracy since the unlettered prophet could not have been suspected of composing the Quran.
TEXT & ARRANGEMENT
The Quran consists of 114 chapters of varying lengths, each known as a sura. Suras are classified as Meccan or Medinan, depending on whether the verses were revealed before or after the migration of Muhammad to the city of Medina. However, a sura classified as Medinan may contain Meccan verses in it and vice versa. Sura titles are derived from a name or quality discussed in the text, or from the first letters or words of the surah. Suras are arranged roughly in order of decreasing size. The sura arrangement is thus not connected to the sequence of revelation. Each sura except the ninth starts with the Bismillah (بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم) an Arabic phrase meaning 'In the name of God.' There are, however, still 114 occurrences of the Bismillah in the Quran, due to its presence in Quran 27:30 as the opening of Solomon's letter to the Queen of Sheba.
Each sura consists of several verses, known as ayat, which originally means a 'sign' or 'evidence' sent by God. The number of verses differs from sura to sura. An individual verse may be just a few letters or several lines. The total number of verses in the Quran is 6236, however, the number varies if the bismillahs are counted separately.
In addition to and independent of the division into suras, there are various ways of dividing the Quran into parts of approximately equal length for convenience in reading. The 30 juz' (plural ajzāʼ) can be used to read through the entire Quran in a month. Some of these parts are known by names - which are the first few words by which the juzʼ starts. A juz' is sometimes further divided into two ḥizb (plural aḥzāb), and each hizb subdivided into four rubʻ al-ahzab. The Quran is also divided into seven approximately equal parts, manzil (plural manāzil), for it to be recited in a week.
Muqatta'at, or the Quranic initials, are 14 different letter combinations of 14 Arabic letters that appear in the beginning of 29 suras of the Quran. The meanings of these initials remain unclear.
According to one estimate the Quran consists of 77,430 words, 18,994 unique words, 12,183 stems, 3,382 lemmas and 1,685 roots.
CONTENTS
The Quranic content is concerned with the basic beliefs of Islam which include the existence of God and the resurrection. Narratives of the early prophets, ethical and legal subjects, historical events of Muhammad's time, charity and prayer also appear in the Quran. The Quranic verses contain general exhortations regarding right and wrong and the historical events are related to outline general moral lessons. Verses pertaining to natural phenomena have been interpreted by Muslims as an indication of the authenticity of the Quranic message.
MONOTHEISM
The central theme of the Quran is monotheism. God is depicted as living, eternal, omniscient and omnipotent (see, e.g., Quran 2:20, 2:29, 2:255). God's omnipotence appears above all in his power to create. He is the creator of everything, of the heavens and the earth and what is between them (see, e.g., Quran 13:16, 50:38, etc.). All human beings are equal in their utter dependence upon God, and their well-being depends upon their acknowledging that fact and living accordingly.
The Quran uses cosmological and contingency arguments in various verses without referring to the terms to prove the existence of God. Therefore, the universe is originated and needs an originator, and whatever exists must have a sufficient cause for its existence. Besides, the design of the universe, is frequently referred to as a point of contemplation: "It is He who has created seven heavens in harmony. You cannot see any fault in God's creation; then look again: Can you see any flaw?"
ESCHATOLOGY
The doctrine of the last day and eschatology (the final fate of the universe) may be reckoned as the second great doctrine of the Quran. It is estimated that around a full one-third of the Quran is eschatological, dealing with the afterlife in the next world and with the day of judgment at the end of time. There is a reference of the afterlife on most pages of the Quran and the belief in the afterlife is often referred to in conjunction with belief in God as in the common expression: "Believe in God and the last day". A number of suras such as 44, 56, 75, 78, 81 and 101 are directly related to the afterlife and its preparations. Some of the suras indicate the closeness of the event and warn people to be prepared for the imminent day. For instance, the first verses of Sura 22, which deal with the mighty earthquake and the situations of people on that day, represent this style of divine address: "O People! Be respectful to your Lord. The earthquake of the Hour is a mighty thing."
The Quran is often vivid in its depiction of what will happen at the end time. Watt describes the Quranic view of End Time:
"The climax of history, when the present world comes to an end, is referred to in various ways. It is 'the Day of Judgment,' 'the Last Day,' 'the Day of Resurrection,' or simply 'the Hour.' Less frequently it is 'the Day of Distinction' (when the good are separated from the evil), 'the Day of the Gathering' (of men to the presence of God) or 'the Day of the Meeting' (of men with God). The Hour comes suddenly. It is heralded by a shout, by a thunderclap, or by the blast of a trumpet. A cosmic upheaval then takes place. The mountains dissolve into dust, the seas boil up, the sun is darkened, the stars fall and the sky is rolled up. God appears as Judge, but his presence is hinted at rather than described. [...] The central interest, of course, is in the gathering of all mankind before the Judge. Human beings of all ages, restored to life, join the throng. To the scoffing objection of the unbelievers that former generations had been dead a long time and were now dust and mouldering bones, the reply is that God is nevertheless able to restore them to life."
The Quran does not assert a natural immortality of the human soul, since man's existence is dependent on the will of God: when he wills, he causes man to die; and when he wills, he raises him to life again in a bodily resurrection.[68]
PROPHETS
According to the Quran, God communicated with man and made his will known through signs and revelations. Prophets, or 'Messengers of God', received revelations and delivered them to humanity. The message has been identical and for all humankind. "Nothing is said to you that was not said to the messengers before you, that your lord has at his Command forgiveness as well as a most Grievous Penalty." The revelation does not come directly from God to the prophets. Angels acting as God's messengers deliver the divine revelation to them. This comes out in Quran 42:51, in which it is stated: "It is not for any mortal that God should speak to them, except by revelation, or from behind a veil, or by sending a messenger to reveal by his permission whatsoever He will."
ETHICO-RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS
Belief is the center of the sphere of positive moral properties in the Quran. A number of scholars have tried to determine the semantic contents of the words meaning 'belief' and 'believer' in the Quran [70] The Ethico-legal concepts and exhortations dealing with righteous conduct are linked to a profound awareness of God, thereby emphasizing the importance of faith, accountability and the belief in each human's ultimate encounter with God. People are invited to perform acts of charity, especially for the needy. Believers who "spend of their wealth by night and by day, in secret and in public" are promised that they "shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve" It also affirms family life by legislating on matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. A number of practices such as usury and gambling are prohibited. The Quran is one of the fundamental sources of the Islamic law, or sharia. Some formal religious practices receive significant attention in the Quran including the formal prayers and fasting in the month of Ramadan. As for the manner in which the prayer is to be conducted, the Quran refers to prostration. The term used for charity, Zakat, actually means purification. Charity, according to the Quran, is a means of self-purification.
LITERARY STYLE
The Quran's message is conveyed with various literary structures and devices. In the original Arabic, the suras and verses employ phonetic and thematic structures that assist the audience's efforts to recall the message of the text. Muslims[who?] assert (according to the Quran itself) that the Quranic content and style is inimitable.
The language of the Quran has been described as "rhymed prose" as it partakes of both poetry and prose, however, this description runs the risk of compromising the rhythmic quality of Quranic language, which is certainly more poetic in some parts and more prose-like in others. Rhyme, while found throughout the Quran, is conspicuous in many of the earlier Meccan suras, in which relatively short verses throw the rhyming words into prominence. The effectiveness of such a form is evident for instance in Sura 81, and there can be no doubt that these passages impressed the conscience of the hearers. Frequently a change of rhyme from one set of verses to another signals a change in the subject of discussion. Later sections also preserve this form but the style is more expository.
The Quranic text seems to have no beginning, middle, or end, its nonlinear structure being akin to a web or net. The textual arrangement is sometimes considered to have lack of continuity, absence of any chronological or thematic order and presence of repetition. Michael Sells, citing the work of the critic Norman O. Brown, acknowledges Brown's observation that the seeming disorganization of Quranic literary expression – its scattered or fragmented mode of composition in Sells's phrase – is in fact a literary device capable of delivering profound effects as if the intensity of the prophetic message were shattering the vehicle of human language in which it was being communicated. Sells also addresses the much-discussed repetitiveness of the Quran, seeing this, too, as a literary device.
A text is self-referential when it speaks about itself and makes reference to itself. According to Stefan Wild the Quran demonstrates this meta-textuality by explaining, classifying, interpreting and justifying the words to be transmitted. Self-referentiality is evident in those passages when the Quran refers to itself as revelation (tanzil), remembrance (dhikr), news (naba'), criterion (furqan) in a self-designating manner (explicitly asserting its Divinity, "And this is a blessed Remembrance that We have sent down; so are you now denying it?"), or in the frequent appearance of the 'Say' tags, when Muhammad is commanded to speak (e.g. "Say: 'God's guidance is the true guidance' ", "Say: 'Would you then dispute with us concerning God?' "). According to Wild the Quran is highly self-referential. The feature is more evident in early Meccan suras.
INTERPRETATION
The Quran has sparked a huge body of commentary and explication (tafsīr), aimed at explaining the "meanings of the Quranic verses, clarifying their import and finding out their significance".
Tafsir is one of the earliest academic activities of Muslims. According to the Quran, Muhammad was the first person who described the meanings of verses for early Muslims. Other early exegetes included a few Companions of Muhammad, like ʻAli ibn Abi Talib, ʻAbdullah ibn Abbas, ʻAbdullah ibn Umar and Ubayy ibn Kaʻb. Exegesis in those days was confined to the explanation of literary aspects of the verse, the background of its revelation and, occasionally, interpretation of one verse with the help of the other. If the verse was about a historical event, then sometimes a few traditions (hadith) of Muhammad were narrated to make its meaning clear.
Because the Quran is spoken in classical Arabic, many of the later converts to Islam (mostly non-Arabs) did not always understand the Quranic Arabic, they did not catch allusions that were clear to early Muslims fluent in Arabic and they were concerned with reconciling apparent conflict of themes in the Quran. Commentators erudite in Arabic explained the allusions, and perhaps most importantly, explained which Quranic verses had been revealed early in Muhammad's prophetic career, as being appropriate to the very earliest Muslim community, and which had been revealed later, canceling out or "abrogating" (nāsikh) the earlier text (mansūkh). Other scholars, however, maintain that no abrogation has taken place in the Quran. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has published a 10-volume Urdu commentary on the Quran, with the name Tafseer e Kabir.
ESOTERIC INTERPRETATION
Esoteric or Sufi interpretation attempts to unveil the inner meanings of the Quran. Sufism moves beyond the apparent (zahir) point of the verses and instead relates Quranic verses to the inner or esoteric (batin) and metaphysical dimensions of consciousness and existence. According to Sands, esoteric interpretations are more suggestive than declarative, they are 'allusions' (isharat) rather than explanations (tafsir). They indicate possibilities as much as they demonstrate the insights of each writer.
Sufi interpretation, according to Annabel Keeler, also exemplifies the use of the theme of love, as for instance can seen in Qushayri's interpretation of the Quran. Quran 7:143 says:
"when Moses came at the time we appointed, and his Lord spoke to him, he said, 'My Lord, show yourself to me! Let me see you!' He said, 'you shall not see me but look at that mountain, if it remains standing firm you will see me.' When his Lord revealed Himself to the mountain, He made it crumble. Moses fell down unconscious. When he recovered, he said, 'Glory be to you! I repent to you! I am the first to believe!'"
Moses, in 7:143, comes the way of those who are in love, he asks for a vision but his desire is denied, he is made to suffer by being commanded to look at other than the Beloved while the mountain is able to see God. The mountain crumbles and Moses faints at the sight of God's manifestation upon the mountain. In Qushayri's words, Moses came like thousands of men who traveled great distances, and there was nothing left to Moses of Moses. In that state of annihilation from himself, Moses was granted the unveiling of the realities. From the Sufi point of view, God is the always the beloved and the wayfarer's longing and suffering lead to realization of the truths.[90]
Muhammad Husayn Tabatabaei says that according to the popular explanation among the later exegetes, ta'wil indicates the particular meaning a verse is directed towards. The meaning of revelation (tanzil), as opposed to ta'wil, is clear in its accordance to the obvious meaning of the words as they were revealed. But this explanation has become so widespread that, at present, it has become the primary meaning of ta'wil, which originally meant "to return" or "the returning place". In Tabatabaei's view, what has been rightly called ta'wil, or hermeneutic interpretation of the Quran, is not concerned simply with the denotation of words. Rather, it is concerned with certain truths and realities that transcend the comprehension of the common run of men; yet it is from these truths and realities that the principles of doctrine and the practical injunctions of the Quran issue forth. Interpretation is not the meaning of the verse - rather it transpires through that meaning, in a special sort of transpiration. There is a spiritual reality - which is the main objective of ordaining a law, or the basic aim in describing a divine attribute - and then there is an actual significance that a Quranic story refers to.
According to Shia beliefs, those who are firmly rooted in knowledge like Muhammad and the imams know the secrets of the Quran. According to Tabatabaei, the statement "none knows its interpretation except God" remains valid, without any opposing or qualifying clause. Therefore, so far as this verse is concerned, the knowledge of the Quran's interpretation is reserved for God. But Tabatabaei uses other verses and concludes that those who are purified by God know the interpretation of the Quran to a certain extent.
According to Tabatabaei, there are acceptable and unacceptable esoteric interpretations. Acceptable ta'wil refers to the meaning of a verse beyond its literal meaning; rather the implicit meaning, which ultimately is known only to God and can't be comprehended directly through human thought alone. The verses in question here refer to the human qualities of coming, going, sitting, satisfaction, anger and sorrow, which are apparently attributed to God. Unacceptable ta'wil is where one "transfers" the apparent meaning of a verse to a different meaning by means of a proof; this method is not without obvious inconsistencies. Although this unacceptable ta'wil has gained considerable acceptance, it is incorrect and cannot be applied to the Quranic verses. The correct interpretation is that reality a verse refers to. It is found in all verses, the decisive and the ambiguous alike; it is not a sort of a meaning of the word; it is a fact that is too sublime for words. God has dressed them with words to bring them a bit nearer to our minds; in this respect they are like proverbs that are used to create a picture in the mind, and thus help the hearer to clearly grasp the intended idea.
HISTORY OF SUFI COMMENTARIES
One of the notable authors of esoteric interpretation prior to the 12th century is Sulami (d. 1021 CE) without whose work the majority of very early Sufi commentaries would not have been preserved. Sulami's major commentary is a book named haqaiq al-tafsir ("Truths of Exegesis") which is a compilation of commentaries of earlier Sufis. From the 11th century onwards several other works appear, including commentaries by Qushayri (d. 1074), Daylami (d. 1193), Shirazi (d. 1209) and Suhrawardi (d. 1234). These works include material from Sulami's books plus the author's contributions. Many works are written in Persian such as the works of Maybudi (d. 1135) kash al-asrar ("the unveiling of the secrets"). Rumi (d. 1273) wrote a vast amount of mystical poetry in his book Mathnawi. Rumi makes heavy use of the Quran in his poetry, a feature that is sometimes omitted in translations of Rumi's work. A large number of Quranic passages can be found in Mathnawi, which some consider a kind of Sufi interpretation of the Quran. Rumi's book is not exceptional for containing citations from and elaboration on the Quran, however, Rumi does mention Quran more frequently. Simnani (d. 1336) wrote two influential works of esoteric exegesis on the Quran. He reconciled notions of God's manifestation through and in the physical world with the sentiments of Sunni Islam. Comprehensive Sufi commentaries appears in the 18th century such as the work of Ismail Hakki Bursevi (d. 1725). His work ruh al-Bayan (the Spirit of Elucidation) is a voluminous exegesis. Written in Arabic, it combines the author's own ideas with those of his predecessors (notably Ibn Arabi and Ghazali), all woven together in Hafiz, a Persian poetry form.
LEVELS OF MEANING
Unlike the Salafis and Zahiri, Shias and Sufis as well as some other Muslim philosophers believe the meaning of the Quran is not restricted to the literal aspect. For them, it is an essential idea that the Quran also has inward aspects. Henry Corbin narrates a hadith that goes back to Muhammad:
"The Quran possesses an external appearance and a hidden depth, an exoteric meaning and an esoteric meaning. This esoteric meaning in turn conceals an esoteric meaning (this depth possesses a depth, after the image of the celestial Spheres, which are enclosed within each other). So it goes on for seven esoteric meanings (seven depths of hidden depth)."
According to this view, it has also become evident that the inner meaning of the Quran does not eradicate or invalidate its outward meaning. Rather, it is like the soul, which gives life to the body. Corbin considers the Quran to play a part in Islamic philosophy, because gnosiology itself goes hand in hand with prophetology.
Commentaries dealing with the zahir (outward aspects) of the text are called tafsir, and hermeneutic and esoteric commentaries dealing with the batin are called ta'wil ("interpretation" or "explanation"), which involves taking the text back to its beginning. Commentators with an esoteric slant believe that the ultimate meaning of the Quran is known only to God. In contrast, Quranic literalism, followed by Salafis and Zahiris, is the belief that the Quran should only be taken at its apparent meaning.
TRANSLATIONS
Translation of the Quran has always been a problematic and difficult issue. Many argue that the Quranic text cannot be reproduced in another language or form. Furthermore, an Arabic word may have a range of meanings depending on the context, making an accurate translation even more difficult.
Nevertheless, the Quran has been translated into most African, Asian and European languages. The first translator of the Quran was Salman the Persian, who translated surat al-Fatiha into Persian during the seventh century. Another translation of the Quran was completed in 884 CE in Alwar (Sindh, India now Pakistan) by the orders of Abdullah bin Umar bin Abdul Aziz on the request of the Hindu Raja Mehruk.
The first fully attested complete translations of the Quran were done between the 10th and 12th centuries in Persian language. The Samanid king, Mansur I (961-976), ordered a group of scholars from Khorasan to translate the Tafsir al-Tabari, originally in Arabic, into Persian. Later in the 11th century, one of the students of Abu Mansur Abdullah al-Ansari wrote a complete tafsir of the Quran in Persian. In the 12th century, Najm al-Din Abu Hafs al-Nasafi translated the Quran into Persian. The manuscripts of all three books have survived and have been published several times.
Islamic tradition also holds that translations were made for Emperor Negus of Abyssinia and Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, as both received letters by Muhammad containing verses from the Quran. In early centuries, the permissibility of translations was not an issue, but whether one could use translations in prayer.
In 1936, translations in 102 languages were known. In 2010, the Hürriyet Daily News and Economic Review reported that the Quran was presented in 112 languages at the 18th International Quran Exhibition in Tehran.
The progressive, evolution story
is one huge MISTAKE
which, ironically,
depends on MISTAKES
as its mechanism ...
Mistake
- upon mistake
- upon mistake
- upon mistake
So that the whole human genome
is created from billions of mistakes.
If, after reading this, you still believe in the progressive evolution story - you will believe anything.
EVOLUTION .....
What is the truth about Darwinian, progressive (microbes to human) evolution?
Although we are told it is an irrefutable, scientific fact .....
the real fact is, as we will show later, there is no credible mechanism for such progressive evolution.
So, what was the evolutionary idea that Darwin popularised?
Darwin believed that there was unlimited variability in the gene pool of all creatures and plants.
However, the changes possible were well known by selective breeders to be strictly limited.
This is because the changes seen in selective breeding are due to the shuffling, deletion and emphasis of genetic information already existing in the gene pool (micro-evolution). There is no viable mechanism for creating new, beneficial, genetic information required to create entirely new body parts ... anatomical structures, biological systems, organs etc. (macro-evolution).
Darwin rashly ignored the limits which were well known to breeders (even though he selectively bred pigeons himself, and should have known better). He simply extrapolated the strictly limited, minor changes observed in selective breeding to major, unlimited, progressive changes able to create new structures, organs etc. through natural selection, over an alleged multi-million year timescale.
Of course, the length of time involved made no difference, the existing, genetic information could not increase of its own accord, no matter how long the timescale.
That was a gigantic flaw in Darwinism, and opponents of Darwin's ideas tried to argue that changes were limited, as selective breeding had demonstrated.
But because Darwinism had acquired a status more akin to an ideology than purely, objective science, belief in the Darwinian idea outweighed the verdict of observational and experimental science, and classical Darwinism became firmly established as scientific orthodoxy for nearly a century.
Opponents continued to argue all this time, that Darwinism was unscientific nonsense, but they were ostracised and dismissed as cranks, weirdoes or religious fanatics.
Finally however, it was discovered that the opponents of Darwin were perfectly correct - and that constructive, genetic changes (progressive, macro-evolution) require new, additional, genetic information.
This looked like the ignominious end of Darwinism, as there was no credible, natural mechanism able to create new, constructive, genetic information. And Darwinism should have been heading for the dustbin of history.
Darwin's idea that a single, celled microbe could transform itself into a human and every other living thing, through natural selection over millions of years, had always been totally bonkers. That it is, or ever could have been, regarded as a great 'scientific' theory, beggars belief.
However, rather than ditch the whole idea, the vested interests in Darwinism had become so great, with numerous, lifelong careers and an ideological agenda which had become dependant on the Darwinian belief system, a desperate attempt was made to rescue it from its justified demise.
A mechanism had to be invented to explain the origin of new, constructive information.
That invented mechanism was 'mutations'. Mutations are ... literally, genetic, copying MISTAKES.
The general public had already been convinced that classical Darwinism was a scientific fact, and that anyone who questioned it was a crank, so all that had to be done, as far as the public was concerned, was to give the impression that the theory had simply been refined and updated in the light of modern science.
The fact that classical Darwinism had been wrong all along, and was fatally flawed from the outset was kept quiet. This meant that the opponents of Darwinism, who had been right all along, and were the real champions of science, continued to be vilified as cranks and scorned by the mass media and establishment. Ideology and vested interests took precedence over common sense and proper science.
The new developments were simply portrayed as the evolution and development of the theory. The impression was given that there was nothing wrong with the idea of progressive (macro) evolution, it had simply 'evolved' and 'improved' in the light of greater knowledge.
A sort of progressive evolution of the idea of evolution.
This new, 'improved' Darwinism became known as Neo-Darwinism.
So what is Neo-Darwinism? And did it really solve the fatal flaws of the Darwinian idea?
Neo Darwinism is progressive, macro evolution - as Darwin had proposed, but based on the ludicrous idea that random mutations (accidental, genetic, copying mistakes) selected by natural selection, can provide the constructive, genetic information capable of creating entirely new features, anatomical structures, organs, and biological systems. In other words, it is macro-evolution based on a belief in the total progression from microbes to man through billions of random, genetic, copying MISTAKES, over millions of years.
However, there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and it is should be classified as unscientific nonsense which defies logic, the laws of probability and Information Theory.
Mutations are not good, they are something to be feared, not celebrated as an agent of improvement or progression.
The vast majority of mutations are harmful, they cause illness, cancer and deformities, which is not surprising. It is precisely what we would expect from mistakes.
If you throw a spanner into the works of a machine, you wouldn't expect it to improve the operation of the machine.
Ironically, evolutionists fear mutations as much as everyone else. You won't get evolutionists volunteering to subject themselves or their families to mutagenic agents, you won't get them deliberately going to live near chemical or nuclear plants - in order to give their idea of progressive evolution a helping hand.
Evolutionists know that mutations are very risky and likely to be harmful, and not something anyone should desire.
Yet, perversely, they still present them as the agent responsible for creating the constructive, genetic information which, they claim, progressively transformed the first living cells into every living thing that has ever lived, including humans. Incredible!
People are sometimes confused, because they know that 'micro'-evolution is an observable fact, which everyone accepts. Disgracefully, evolutionists cynically exploit that confusion by citing obvious examples of micro-evolution such as: the Peppered Moth, Darwin's finches, so-called superbugs etc., as evidence of macro-evolution.
Of course such examples are not evidence of macro-evolution at all. The public is simply being hoodwinked and lied to, and it is a disgrace to science. There are no observable examples or evidence of macro-evolution and no examples of a mutation, or a series of mutations capable of creating new anatomical structures, organs etc. and that is a fact. It is no wonder that W R Thompson stated in the preface to the 1959 centenary edition of Darwin's Origin of the Species, that ... the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity.
Micro-evolution is simply the small changes which take place, through natural selection or selective breeding, but only within the strict limits of the built-in variability of the existing gene pool. Any constructive changes outside the extent of the existing gene pool requires a credible mechanism for the creation of new, beneficial, genetic information, that is essential for macro evolution.
Micro evolution does not involve or require the creation of any new, genetic information. So micro evolution and macro evolution are entirely different. There is no connection between them at all, whatever evolutionists may claim.
Once people fully understand that the differences they see in various dogs breeds, for example, are merely an example of limited micro-evolution (selection of existing genetic information) and nothing to do with progressive macro-evolution, they begin to realise that they have been fed an incredible story.
A dog will always remain a dog, it can never be selectively bred into some other creature, the extent of variation is constrained by the limitations of the existing, genetic information in the gene pool of the dog genus, and evolutionists know that.
To explain further.... Neo-Darwinian, macro evolution is the ridiculous idea that everything in the genome of humans and every living thing past and present (apart from the original genetic information in the very first living cell) is the result of millions of genetic copying mistakes..... mutations of mutations .... of mutations.... of mutations .... and so on - and on - and on.
In other words, Neo-Darwinism proposes that the complete genome (every scrap of genetic information in the DNA) of every living thing that has ever lived was created by a long series ... of mistakes ... upon previous mistakes .... upon previous mistakes .... upon previous mistakes etc. etc.
If we look at the whole picture we soon realise that what is actually being proposed by evolutionists is that, apart from the original information in the first living cell (and evolutionists have yet to explain how that original information magically arose?) - every additional scrap of genetic information for all - the biological features, anatomical structures, systems and processes that exist, or have ever existed in living things, such as:
skin, bones, bone joints, shells, flowers, leaves, wings, scales, muscles, fur, hair, teeth, claws, toe and finger nails, horns, beaks, nervous systems, blood, blood vessels, brains, lungs, hearts, digestive systems, vascular systems, liver, kidneys, pancreas, bowels, immune systems, senses, eyes, ears, sex organs, sexual reproduction, sperm, eggs, pollen, the process of metamorphosis, marsupial pouches, marsupial embryo migration, mammary glands, hormone production, melanin etc. .... have been created from scratch, by an incredibly long series of small, accumulated mistakes ... mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - over and over again, millions of times.
That is ... every body part, system and process of all living things are the result of literally billions of genetic MISTAKES of MISTAKES, accumulated over many millions of years.
All this from an original, single, living cell.
If, for example, there is no genetic information for bones in the original living cell, how could copying mistakes of the original, limited information in such a single cell produce such entirely new information?
Incredibly, what we are asked to believe is that something like a vascular system, or reproductive organs, developed in small, random, incremental steps, with every step being the result of a copying mistake, and with each step being able to provide a significant survival or reproductive advantage in order to be preserved and become dominant in the gene pool. Incredible!
If you believe that ... you will believe anything.
Even worse, evolutionists have yet to cite a single example of a positive, beneficial, mutation which adds constructive information to the genome of any creature. Yet they expect us to believe that we have been converted from an original, single living cell into humans by an accumulation of billions of beneficial mutations (mistakes).
Conclusion:
Progressive, microbes-to-man evolution is impossible - there is no credible mechanism to produce all the new, genetic information which is essential for that to take place.
The evolution story is an obvious fairy tale presented as scientific fact.
However, nothing has changed - those who dare to question Neo-Darwinism are still portrayed as idiots, retards, cranks, weirdoes, anti-scientific ignoramuses or religious fanatics.
Want to join the club?
What about the fossil record?
The formation of fossils.
Books explaining how fossils are formed frequently give the impression that it takes many years of build up of layers of sediment to bury organic remains, which then become fossilised.
Therefore many people don't realise that this impression is erroneous, because it is a fact that all good, intact fossils require rapid burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction.
So it is evident that rock containing good, undamaged fossils was laid down rapidly, sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of intact fossils is a testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
You don't get fossils from slow burial. Organic remains don't just sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a long period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several or many strata (sometimes called layers) which clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed simultaneously in a single event by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not stratum by stratum over long periods of time or different geological eras, which is the evolutionist's, uniformitarian interpretation of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person claim that strata or, for that matter, any fossil bearing rock, could have taken millions of years to form?
What do laboratory experiments and field studies of recent, sedimentation events show? sedimentology.fr/
You don't even need to be a qualified sedimentologist or geologist to come to that conclusion, it is common sense.
Rapid formation of strata - some recent, field evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
When no evidence is cited as evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/
What about all the claimed scientific evidence that evolutionists have found for evolution?
The evolutionist 'scientific' method has resulted in a serious decline in scientific integrity, and has given us such scientific abominations as:
Piltdown Man (a fake),
Nebraska Man (a pig),
South West Colorado Man (a horse),
Orce man (a donkey),
Embryonic Recapitulation (a fraud),
Archaeoraptor (a fake),
Java Man (a giant gibbon),
Peking Man (a monkey),
Montana Man (an extinct dog-like creature)
Nutcracker Man (an extinct type of ape - Australopithecus)
The Horse Series (unrelated species cobbled together),
Peppered Moth (faked photographs)
The Orgueil meteorite (faked evidence)
Etc. etc.
Anyone can call anything 'science' ... it doesn't make it so.
All these examples were trumpeted by evolutionists as scientific evidence for evolution.
Do we want to trust evolutionists claims about scientific evidence, when they have such an appalling record?
Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?
www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
Want to publish a science paper?
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7036/full/nature03653...
www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gib...
Piltdown Man was even used in the famous, Scopes Trial as positive evidence for evolution.
Piltdown Man reigned for over 40 years, as a supreme example of evidence of human evolution, before it was exposed as a crudely, fashioned fake.
Is that 'science'?
The ludicrous Hopeful Monster Theory and so-called Punctuated Equilibrium (evolution in big jumps followed by long periods of stasis) were invented by evolutionists as a desperate attempt to explain away the lack of fossil evidence for evolution. They are proposed methods of evolution which, it is claimed, need no fossil evidence. They are actually an admission that the required fossil evidence does not exist.
Piltdown Man... it survived as alleged proof of evolution for over 40 years in evolution textbooks and was taught in schools and universities, it survived peer reviews etc. and was used as supposed irrefutable evidence for evolution at the famous Scopes Trial..
Nebraska Man, this was a single tooth of a peccary. it was trumpeted as evidence for the evolution of humans, and artists impressions of an ape-like man appeared in newspapers magazines etc. Such 'scientific' evidence is enough to make any genuine, respectable scientist weep.
South West Colorado Man, another tooth .... of a horse this time... presented as more evidence for human evolution.
Orce man, a fragment of skullcap, which was most likely from a donkey, but even if it was human. such a tiny fragment is certainly not any proof of human evolution as it was made out to be.
Embryonic Recapitulation, the evolutionist zealot Ernst Haeckel (who was a hero of Hitler) published fraudulent drawings of embryos and his theory was readily accepted by evolutionists as proof of evolution. Even after he was exposed as a fraudster, evolutionists still continued to use his fraudulent evidence in books and publications on evolution, including school textbooks, until very recently.
Archaeoraptor, A so-called feathered dinosaur from the Chinese fossil faking industry. It managed to fool credulous evolutionists, because it was exactly what they were looking for. The evidence fitted the wishful thinking.
Java Man, Dubois, the man who discovered Java Man and declared it a human ancestor ..... admitted much later that it was actually a giant gibbon, however, that spoilt the evolution story which had been built up around it, so evolutionists were reluctant to get rid of it, and still maintained it was a human ancestor. Dubois had also 'forgotten' to mention that he found the bones of modern humans at the same site.
Peking Man, made up from monkey skulls which were found in an ancient limestone burning industrial site where there were crushed monkey skulls and modern human bones. Drawings were made of Peking Man, but the original skull conveniently disappeared. So that allowed evolutionists to continue to use it as evidence without fear of it ever being debunked.
The Horse Series, unrelated species cobbled together, They were from different continents and were in no way a proper series of intermediates, They had different numbers of ribs etc. and the very first in the line, is similar to a creature alive today - the Hyrax.
Peppered Moth, moths were glued to trees to fake photographs for the peppered moth evidence. They don't normally rest on trees in daytime. In any case, the selection of a trait which is part of the variability of the existing gene pool, is not progressive evolution. It is just normal, natural selection within limits, which no-one disputes.
The Orgueil meteorite, organic material and even plant seeds were embedded and glued into the Orgueil meteorite and disguised with coal dust to make them look like part of the original meteorite, in a fraudulent attempt to fool the world into believing in the discredited idea of spontaneous generation of life, which is essential for progressive evolution to get started. The reasoning being that, if it could be shown that there was life in space, spontaneous generation must have happened there and could therefore be declared by evolutionists as being a scientific fact.
Is macro evolution even science? The answer to that has to be an emphatic - NO!
The usual definition of science is: that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Evolution cannot be proved, or tested; it is claimed to have happened in the past, and, as such, it is not subject to the scientific method. It is merely a belief.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs, especially if there is a wealth of evidence to support them, but they should not be presented as scientific fact. As we have shown, in the case of progressive evolution, there is a wealth of evidence against it. Nevertheless, we are told by evolutionist zealots that microbes to man evolution is a fact and likewise the spontaneous generation of life from sterile matter. They are deliberately misleading the public on both counts. Evolution is not only not a fact, it is not even proper science.
You don't need a degree in rocket science to understand that Darwinism has damaged and undermined science.
However, what does the world's, most famous, rocket scientist (the father of modern rocket science) have to say?
Wernher von Braun (1912 – 1977) PhD Aerospace Engineering
"In recent years, there has been a disturbing trend toward scientific dogmatism in some areas of science. Pronouncements by notable scientists and scientific organizations about "only one scientifically acceptable explanation" for events which are clearly outside the domain of science -- like all origins are -- can only destroy the curiosity of those who must carry on the future work of science. Humility, a seemingly natural product of studying nature, appears to have largely disappeared -- at least its visibility is clouded from the public's viewpoint.
Extrapolation backward in time until there are no physical artifacts of certainty that can be examined, requires sophisticated guessing which scientists prefer to refer to as "inference." Since hypotheses, a product of scientific inference, are virtually the stuff that comprises the cutting edge of scientific progress, inference must constantly be nurtured. However, the enthusiasm that encourages inference must be matched in degree with caution that clearly differentiates inference from what the public so readily accepts as "scientific fact." Failure to keep these two factors in balance can lead either to a sterile or a seduced science. 'Science but not Scientists' (2006) p.xi"
And the eminent scientist, William Robin Thompson (1887 - 1972) Entomologist and Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada, who was asked to write the introduction of the centenary edition of Darwin's 'Origin', wrote:
"The concept of organic Evolution is very highly prized by biologists, for many of whom it is an object of genuinely religious devotion, because they regard it as a supreme integrative principle. This is probably the reason why the severe methodological criticism employed in other departments of biology has not yet been brought to bear against evolutionary speculation." 'Science and Common Sense' (1937) p.229
“As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists … because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of evolutionists show that they think this unreasonable ......
This situation, where scientific men rally to the defence of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and unwise in science.”
Prof. W. R. Thompson, F.R.S., introduction to the 1956 edition of Darwin's 'Origin of the Species'
"When I was asked to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Anthony Keith [one of the "discoverers" of Piltdown Man], I felt extremely hesitant to accept the invitation . . I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial. If arguments fail to resist analysis, consent should be withheld and a wholesale conversion due to unsound argument must be regarded as deplorable. He fell back on speculative arguments."
"He merely showed, on the basis of certain facts and assumptions, how this might have happened, and as he had convinced himself he was able to convince others."
"But the facts and interpretations on which Darwin relied have now ceased to convince."
"This general tendency to eliminate, by means of unverifiable speculations, the limits of the categories Nature presents to us is the inheritance of biology from The Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by the theory, historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking. Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis, where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."—*W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," to Everyman’s Library issue of Charles Darwin, Origin of Species (1958 edition).
"The evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but rather is a serious obstruction to biological research. It obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results, even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built up."—*H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbildng, 1954, p. 11
Berkeley University law professor, Philip Johnson, makes the following points: “(1) Evolution is grounded not on scientific fact, but on a philosophical belief called naturalism; (2) the belief that a large body of empirical evidence supports evolution is an illusion; (3) evolution is itself a religion; and, (4) if evolution were a scientific hypothesis based on rigorous study of the evidence, it would have been abandoned long ago.”
DNA.
The discovery of DNA should have been the death knell for evolution. It is only because evolutionists tend to manipulate and interpret evidence to suit their own preconceptions that makes them believe DNA is evidence FOR evolution.
It is clear that there is no natural mechanism which can produce constructional, biological information, such as that encoded in DNA.
Information Theory (and common sense) tells us that the unguided interaction of matter and energy cannot produce constructive information.
Do evolutionists even know where the very first, genetic information in the alleged Primordial Soup came from?
Of course they don't, but with the usual bravado, they bluff it out, and regardless, they rashly present the spontaneous generation of life as a scientific fact.
However, a fact, it certainly isn't .... and good science it certainly isn't.
Even though evolutionists have no idea whatsoever about how the first, genetic information originated, they still claim that the spontaneous generation of life (abiogenesis) is an established scientific fact, but this is completely disingenuous. Apart from the fact that abiogenesis violates the Law of Biogenesis, the Law of Cause and Effect and the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it also violates Information Theory.
Evolutionists have an enormous problem with explaining how the DNA code itself originated. However that is not even the major problem. The impression is given to the public by evolutionists that they only have to find an explanation for the origin of DNA by natural processes - and the problem of the origin of genetic information will have been solved.
That is a confusion in the minds of many people that evolutionists cynically exploit,
Explaining how DNA was formed by chemical processes, explains only how the information storage medium was formed, it tells us nothing about the origin of the information it carries.
To clarify this it helps to compare DNA to other information, storage mediums.
For example, if we compare DNA to the written word, we understand that the alphabet is a tangible medium for storing, recording and expressing information, it is not information in itself. The information is recorded in the sequence of letters, forming meaningful words.
You could say that the alphabet is the 'hardware' created from paper and ink, and the sequential arrangement of the letters is the software. The software is a mental construct, not a physical one.
The same applies to DNA. DNA is not information of itself, just like the alphabet it is the medium for storing and expressing information. It is an amazingly efficient storage medium. However, it is the sequence or arrangement of the amino acids which is the actual information, not the DNA code.
So, if evolutionists are ever able to explain how DNA was formed by chemical processes, it would explain only how the information storage medium was formed. It will tell us nothing about the origin of the information it carries.
Thus, when atheists and evolutionists tell us it is only a matter of time before 'science' will be able to fill the 'gaps' in our knowledge and explain the origin of genetic information, they are not being honest. Explaining the origin of the 'hardware' by natural processes is an entirely different matter to explaining the origin of the software.
Next time you hear evolutionists skating over the problem of the origin of genetic information with their usual bluff and bluster, and parroting their usual nonsense about science being able to fill such gaps in knowledge in the future, don't be fooled. They cannot explain the origin of genetic information, and never will be able to. The software cannot be created by chemical processes or the interaction of energy and matter, it is not possible. If you don't believe that. then by all means put it to the test, by challenging any evolutionist to explain how genetic information (not DNA) can originate by natural means? I can guarantee they won't be able to do so.
It is true to say - the evolution cupboard is bare when it come to real, tangible evidence.
For example:
1.The origin of life is still a mystery, evolutionists have failed to demonstrate that the Law of Biogenesis (which rules out the spontaneous generation of life) is not universally valid.
2.They have no explanation for where the first, genetic information came from.
3.They assume (without any evidence) that matter is somehow intrinsically predisposed to produce life whenever the environmental conditions for life permit.
4.They deny that there is any purpose in the universe, yet completely contradict that premise by assuming the above intrinsic predisposition of matter to produce life, as though matter is somehow endowed with a 'blueprint' for the creation of life.
5.They have no credible mechanism for the increase of genetic information required for progressive evolution and increasing complexity.
6.They have failed to produce any credible, intermediate, fossil examples, in spite of searching for over 150 years. There should be millions of examples, yet there is not a single one which is a watertight example.
7.They regularly publish so-called evidence which, when properly examined, is discovered to be nothing of the sort: Example ... Orce Man (the skullcap of a donkey!).
8.They use dubious dating techniques, such as circular reasoning in the dating of fossils and rocks.
9. They discard any evidence - radiocarbon dating, sedimentation experiments, fossils etc. that doesn't fit the preconceptions.
10. They frequently make the claim that there has to be life on other planets, simply on the assumption (without evidence) that life spontaneously generated and evolved on Earth which they take it for granted is a proven fact.
11.They cannot produce a single, credible example of a genuinely, beneficial mutation, yet billions would be required for microbes to human evolution.
There is much more, but that should suffice to debunk the incessant hype and propaganda that microbes-to-human evolution is an established, irrefutable fact.
It should be enough to put an end to the greatest fraud that has been foisted on the public in scientific history.
We are constantly told by evolutionists that the majority of scientists accept progressive evolution (as though that gives it credence) ... but most scientists, don't actually study evolution in any depth, because it is outside their field of expertise. They simply trust what they are taught in school, and mistakenly trust the integrity of evolutionists to present evidence objectively.
That is another great MISTAKE!
Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts&list=TLqiH-mJoVPB...
FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE
The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins
www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...
"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."
kgov.com/big-bang-predictions
Dr James Tour - 'The Origin of Life' - Abiogenesis decisively refuted.
dahon© 2010
The entrance to the Australian Parliament House in Canberra..
Details:
Taken with the Sigma 10-20 lens
Shot @ 10mm
1 RAW file [0EV]
2 Extrapolated Exposures [-2,+2]
Combined, Tonemapped & Boosted through Photomatix
Minor Sharpening, Crop & Curves applied through Photoshop
| On Black | my blog.. | my twitter.. |
n2 Kodak Vericolor 8x10" color negatives.
Scan on our Dainippon Screen drum scanner.
-----
CastorScan's philosophy is completely oriented to provide the highest scan and postproduction
quality on the globe.
We work with artists, photographers, agencies, laboratories etc. who demand a state-of-the-art quality at reasonable prices.
Our workflow is fully manual and extremely meticulous in any stage.
We developed exclusive workflows and profilation systems to obtain unparallel results from our scanners not achievable through semi-automatic and usual workflows.
-----
CastorScan uses the best scanners in circulation, Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II, the best and most advanced scanner ever made, Kodak-Creo IQSmart 3, a high-end flatbed scanner, and Imacon 848.
The image quality offered by our Dainippon Screen 8060 scanner is much higher than that achievable with the best flatbed scanners or filmscanners dedicated and superior to that of scanners so-called "virtual drum" (Imacon – Hasselblad,) and, of course, vastly superior to that amateur or prosumer obtained with scanners such as Epson V750 etc .
Dainippon Screen SG-8060P Mark II exceeds in quality any other scanner, including Aztek Premier and ICG 380 (in the results, not just in the technical specifications).
8060's main features: 12000 dpi, Hi-Q Xenon lamp, 25 apertures, 2 micron
Aztek Premier's main features: 8000 dpi, halogen lamp, 18 apertures, 3 micron
ICG 380's main features: 12000 dpi, halogen lamp, 9 apertures, 4 micron
Some of the features that make the quality of our drum scanners better than any other existing scan system include:
The scans performed on a drum scanner are famous for their detail, depth and realism.
Scans are much cleaner and show fewer imperfections than scans obtained from CCD scanners, and thus save many hours of cleaning and spotting in postproduction.
Image acquisition by the drum scanner is optically similar to using a microscopic lens that scans the image point by point with extreme precision and without deformation or distortion of any kind, while other scanners use enlarger lenses (such as the Rodenstock-Linos Magnagon 75mm f8 used in the Hasselblad-Imacon scanners) and have transmission systems with rubber bands: this involves mild but effective micro-strain and micro-geometric image distortions and quality is not uniform between the center and edges.
Drum scanners are exempt from problems of flatness of the originals, since the same are mounted on a perfectly balanced transparent acrylic drum; on the contrary, the dedicated film scanners that scan slides or negatives in their plastic frames are subject to quite significant inaccuracies, as well as the Imacon-Hasselblad scanners, which have their own rubber and plastic holders: they do not guarantee the perfect flatness of the original and therefore a uniform definition between center and edge, especially with medium and large size originals, which instead are guaranteed by drum scanners.
Again, drum scanners allow scanning at high resolution over the entire surface of the cylinder, while for example the Hasselblad Imacon scans are limited to 3200 dpi in 120 format and 2000 dpi in 4x5" format (the resolution of nearly every CCD scanner in the market drops as the size of the original scanned is increased).
Drum scanners allow complete scanning of the whole negative, including the black-orange mask, perforations etc, while using many other scanners a certain percentage of the image is lost because it is covered by frames or holders.
Drum scanners use photomultiplier tubes to record the light signal, which are much more sensitive than CCDs and can record many more nuances and variations in contrast with a lower digital noise.
If you look at a monitor at 100% the detail in shadows and darker areas of a scan made with a CCD scanner, you will notice that the details are not recorded in a clear and clean way, and the colors are more opaque and less differentiated. Additionally the overall tones are much less rich and differentiated.
We would like to say a few words about an unscrupulous and deceitful use of technical specifications reported by many manufacturers of consumer and prosumer scanners; very often we read of scanners that promise cheap or relatively cheap “drum scanner” resolutions, 16 bits of color depth, extremely high DMAX: we would like to say that these “nominal” resolutions do not correspond to an actual optical resolution, so that even in low-resolution scanning you can see an enormous gap between drum scanners and these scanners in terms of detail, as well as in terms of DMAX, color range, realism, “quality” of grain. So very often when using these consumer-prosumer scanners at high resolutions, it is normal to get a disproportionate increase of file size in MB but not an increase of detail and quality.
To give a concrete example: a drum scan of a 24x36mm color negative film at 3500 dpi is much more defined than a scan made with mostly CCD scanner at 8000 dpi and a drum scan at 2500 dpi is dramatically clearer than a scan at 2500 dpi provided by a CCD scanner. So be aware and careful with incorrect advertisement.
Scans can be performed either dry or liquid-mounted. The wet mounting further improves cleanliness (helps to hide dirt, scratches and blemishes) and plasticity of the image without compromising the original, and in addition by mounting with liquid the film grain is greatly reduced and it looks much softer and more pleasant than the usual "harsh" grain resulting from dry scans.
We use Kami SMF 2001 liquid to mount the transparencies and Kami RC 2001 for cleaning the same. Kami SMF 2001 evaporates without leaving traces, unlike the traditional oil scans, ensuring maximum protection for your film. Out of ignorance some people prefer to avoid liquid scanning because they fear that their films will be dirty or damaged: this argument may be plausible only in reference to scans made using mineral oils, which have nothing to do with the specific professional products we use.
We strongly reiterate that your original is in no way compromised by our scanning liquid and will return as you have shipped it, if not cleaner.
With respect to scanning from slides:
Our scanners are carefully calibrated with the finest IT8 calibration targets in circulation and with special customized targets in order to ensure that each scan faithfully reproduces the original color richness even in the most subtle nuances, opening and maintaining detail in shadows and highlights. These color profiles allow our scanners to realize their full potential, so we guarantee our customers that even from a chromatic point of view our scans are noticeably better than similar scans made by mostly other scan services in the market.
In addition, we remind you that our 8060 drum scanner is able to read the deepest shadows of slides without digital noise and with much more detail than CCD scanners; also, the color range and color realism are far better.
With respect to scanning from color and bw negatives: we want to emphasize the superiority of our drum scans not only in scanning slides, but also in color and bw negative scanning (because of the orange mask and of very low contrast is extremely difficult for any ccd scanner to read the very slight tonal and contrast nuances in the color negative, while a perfectly profiled 8060 drum scanner – also through the analog gain/white calibration - can give back much more realistic images and true colors, sharper and more three-dimensional).
In spite of what many claim, a meticulous color profiling is essential not only for scanning slides, but also, and even more, for color negatives. Without it the scan of a color negative will produce chromatic errors rather significant, thus affecting the tonal balance and then the naturalness-pleasantness of the images.
More unique than rare, we do not use standardized profiles provided by the software to invert each specific negative film, because they do not take into account parameters and variables such as the type of development, the level of exposure, the type of light etc.,; at the same time we also avoid systems of "artificial intelligence" or other functions provided by semi-automatic scanning softwares, but instead we carry out the inversion in a full manual workflow for each individual picture.
In addition, scanning with Imacon-Hasselblad scanners we do not use their proprietary software - Flexcolor – to make color management and color inversion because we strongly believe that our alternative workflow provides much better results, and we are able to prove it with absolute clarity.
At each stage of the process we take care of meticulously adjusting the scanning parameters to the characteristics of the originals, to extrapolate the whole range of information possible from any image without "burning" or reductions in the tonal range, and strictly according to our customer's need and taste.
By default, we do not apply unsharp mask (USM) in our scans, except on request.
To scan reflective originals we follow the same guidelines and guarantee the same quality standard.
We guarantee the utmost thoroughness and expertise in the work of scanning and handling of the originals and we provide scans up to 12,000 dpi of resolution, at 16-bit, in RGB, GRAYSCALE, LAB or CMYK color mode; unless otherwise indicated, files are saved with Adobe RGB 1998 or ProPhoto RGB color profile.
A picture extrapolated from the "Letters to Tacloban" reportage.
LETTERS TO TACLOBAN - Full documentary on
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI2aVCAsbGA&spfreload=10
Ten months ago, typhoon Haiyan hit the Philippines.
What was left behind was a wounded country with cities such as Tacloban, completely destroyed.
The government received help from many countries and international NGOs, but the reconstruction plan is far from being completed.
The core of this movie is the story of a group of children who relocated to Calabanga after the disaster, and the delivery of their letters to their families in Tacloban.
From Manila to Calabanga, through Legazpi and Tacloban, this documentary highlights the slow and painful process of both physical and emotional reconstruction after the strongest typhoon ever recorded, hit the Philippines.
Check the Trailer on:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=X81Lo0mV0RI&list=UU8wz023WyA9...
For the full story:
+++ 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 Gloster Glaive was basically a modernized and re-engined variant of the successful, British-built Gloster Gladiator (or Gloster SS.37), the RAF’s final biplane fighter to enter service. The Gladiator was not only widely used by the RAF at the dawn of WWII and in almost every theatre of operations, but also by many other nations. Operators included Norway, Belgium, Sweden, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania or Nationalist China, and while the RAF already opted for more modern monoplanes, Gloster saw the opportunity to sell an updated Gladiator to countries which were not as progressive.
Originally designated Gladiator Mk. IV, the machine received many aerodynamic refinements and the motor was changed from a draggy radial to a liquid-cooled inline engine. The latter was the new Rolls Royce Peregrine, a development of the Kestrel. It was, in its original form, a 21-litre (1,300 cu in) liquid-cooled V-12 aero engine ), delivering 885-horsepower (660 kW). The engine was housed under a streamlined cowling, driving a three blade metal propeller, and was coupled with a ventral radiator bath, reminiscent of the Hawker Fury biplane’s arrangement.
Structural improvements included an all-metal monocoque fuselage and stabilizers, as well as new wings and streamlined struts with reduced bracing. The upper wing was enlarged and of all-metal construction, too, while the lower wings were reduced in span and area, almost resulting in a sesquiplane layout. The total wing area was only marginally reduced, though.
The fixed landing gear was retained, but the main wheels were now covered with spats. The pilot still sat in a fully enclosed cockpit, the armament consisted of four machine guns, similar to the Gladiator. But for the Glaive, all Browning machine guns were synchronized and mounted in the fuselage: one pair was placed on top of the cowling, in front of the cockpit. Another pair, much like the Gladiator’s arrangement was placed in the fuselage flanks, below the exhaust outlets.
Compared with the Gladiator, the design changes were so fundamental that Gloster eventually decided to allocate a separate designation – also with a view to the type’s foreign marketing, since a new aircraft appeared more attractive than another mark of a pre-war design. For the type’s virgin flight in late 1938 the name “Glaive” was unveiled to the public, and several smaller European air forces immediately showed interest, including Greece, Croatia, Turkey, Portugal and Egypt.
Greece was one of the initial customers, and the first of a total of 24 aircraft for the Hellenic Air Force was delivered in early 1939, with 24 more on order (which were never delivered, though). The initial batch arrived just in time, since tension had been building between Greece and Italy since 7 April 1939, when Italian troops occupied Albania. On 28 October 1940, Italy issued an ultimatum to Greece, which was promptly rejected. A few hours later, Italian troops launched an invasion of Greece, initiating the Greco-Italian War.
The Hellenic Gloster Glaives were split among three Mirae Dioxeos (Fighter Squadrons): the 21st at Trikala, 22nd at Thessaloniki and 23rd at Larissa. When Italy attacked in October 1940, the British fighter was, together with the PZL 24, the Greeks' only modern type in adequate numbers. However, by late 1940, the Gloster Glaive was already no longer a front-runner despite a powerful powerplant and satisfactory armament. It had no speed advantage over the Fiat Cr.42 nor could it outfly the nimble Italian biplane, and it was much slower than the Macchi MC.200 and the Fiat G.50 it was pitted against. Its agility was the only real advantage against the Italian fighters, whose reliance on the slow firing Breda-SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns proved detrimental.
Anyway, on 5 April 1941, German forces invaded Greece and quickly established air superiority. As the Allied troops retreated, British and Hellenic forces covered them, before flying to Crete during the last week of April. There, the refugee aircraft recorded a few claims over twin-engine aircraft before being evacuated to Egypt during the Battle of Crete.
Overall, the Glaives performed gallantly during the early period of the conflict, holding their own against impossible numerical odds and despite the fact that their main target were enemy bombers which forced them to fight at a disadvantage against enemy fighters. Italian claims of easy superiority over the Albanian front were vastly over-rated and their kill claims even exceeded the total number of operational fighters on the Greek side. Total Greek fighter losses in combat came to 24 a/c with the Greek fighter pilots claiming 64 confirmed kills and 24 probables (about two third bombers).
By April 1941, however, lack of spares and attrition had forced the Hellenic Air Force to merge the surviving seven Glaives with five leftover PZL.24s into one understrength squadron supported by five Gloster Gladiators Mk I & II and the two surviving MB.151s. These fought hopelessly against the Luftwaffe onslaught, and most aircraft were eventually lost on the ground. None of the Hellenic Gloster Glaives survived the conflict.
General characteristics:
Crew: two
Length: 8.92m (29 ft 3 in)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 11 ft 9 in (3.58 m)
Wing area: 317 ft² (29.4 m²)
Empty weight: 1,295 kg (2,855 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,700 kg (3,748 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Rolls Royce Peregrine II liquid-cooled V12 inline engine, rated at 940 hp (700 kw)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 405 km/h (252 mph; 219 kn) at 4,400 m (14,436 ft)
Cruise speed: 345 km/h (214 mph; 186 kn)
Stall speed: 60 mph (52 knots, 96 km/h)
Range: 373 mi (600 km; 324 nmi)
Endurance: 2 hours
Service ceiling: 10,600 m (34,800 ft)
Rate of climb: 2,982 ft/min (15.15 m/s)
Time to altitude: 10.000 ft (3.050 m) in 3 minutes 20 seconds
Armament:
4× 0.303 calibre (7.7 mm) M1919 Browning machine guns in the fuselage
Provisions for 6× 10 kg (22 lb) or 4x 20 kg (44 lb) bombs under the lower wings
The kit and its assembly:
The fictional Gloster Glaive started quite simple with the idea of replacing the Gladiator’s radial with an inline engine. But this soon did not appear enough for an update – the Peregrine hardly delivered much more power than the former Mercury, so I considered some structural updates, too. Most of them comprised the replacement of former fabric-covered structures, and this led conceptually to a kitbash with only some Gladiator fuselage and tail parts left.
The basis is (once more) the very nice Matchbox Gloster Gladiator, but it was heavily modified. As an initial step, fuselage, fin and stabilizers (all OOB parts) lost their rib-and-fabric structure, simply sanded away. A minor detail, but it changes the overall look of the aircraft a lot, making it appear much more modern.
The fuselage was left without the OOB radial, and instead a leftover Merlin front end from an Airfix Hurricane (ca. 1cm long, left over from one of my first whif builds ever, a Hurricane with a radial engine!) was added. The lines match pretty well: the side profile looks sleek, if not elegant, but the Gladiator fuselage turned out to be wider than expected. Some major body work/PSR was necessary to integrate the new nose, but the result looks very good.
The liquid-cooled engine necessitated a radiator somewhere on the airframe…! Since I wanted the nose to remain slim and streamlined I eventually placed the radiator bath under the fuselage, much like the arrangement of the Hawker Fury biplane. The radiator itself comes from a late Spitfire (FROG kit).
The exhaust was taken from the Hurricane kit, too, and matching slits dug into the putty nose to take them. The three blade propeller is a mash-up, too: the spinner belongs, IIRC, to an early Spitfire (left over from an AZ Models kit) while the blades came from a damaged Matchbox Brewster Buffalo.
The Gladiator’s fuselage flank machine guns were kept and their “bullet channels” extrapolated along the new cowling, running under the new exhaust pipes. Another pair of machine guns were placed on top of the engine – for these, openings were carved into the upper hull and small fairings (similar to the Browning guns in the flanks) added. This arrangement appeared plausible to me, since the Gladiator’s oil cooler was not necessary anymore and the new lower wings (see below) were not big enough anymore to take the Gladiator’s underwing guns. Four MGs in the fuselage appears massive – but there were other types with such an arrangement, e.g. the Avia B-534 with four guns in the flanks and an inline engine.
The wings are complete replacements: the upper wing comes from a Heller Curtiss SBC4, while the lower wings as well as the spats (on shortened OOB Gladiator struts) come from an ICM Polikarpov I-153. All struts were scratched. Once the lower wings were in place and the relative position of the upper wing clear, the outer struts were carved from 1mm styrene sheet, using the I-153 design as benchmark. These were glued to the lower wing first, and, once totally dry after 24h, the upper wing was simply glued onto the top and the wing position adjusted. This was left to dry another 24h, and as a final step the four struts above the cowling (using the OOB struts, but as single parts and trimmed for proper fit) were placed. This way, a stable connection is guaranteed – and the result is surprisingly sturdy.
Rigging was done with heated sprue material – my personal favorite for this delicate task, and executed before painting the kit started so that the glue could cure and bond well.
Painting and markings:
The reason why this aircraft ended in Greek service is a color photograph of a crashed Hellenic Bloch M.B. 152 (coded ‘D 177’, to be specific). I guess that the picture was post-colored, though, because the aircraft of French origin sports rather weird colors: the picture shows a two-tone scheme in a deep, rather reddish chestnut brown and a light green that almost looks like teal. Unique, to say the least... Underside colors couldn’t be identified with certainty in the picture, but appeared like a pale but not too light blue grey.
Anyway, I assume that these colors are pure fiction and exaggerated Photoshop work, since the few M.B. 152s delivered to Greece carried AFAIK standard French camouflage (in French Khaki, Chestnut Brown and Blue-Grey on the upper surfaces, and a very light blue-grey from below). I’d assume that the contrast between the grey and green tones was not very obvious in the original photograph, so that the artist, not familiar with WWII paint schemes, replaced both colors with the strange teal tone and massively overmodulated the brown.
As weird as it looked, I liked this design and used it as an inspirational benchmark for my Hellenic Glaive build. After all, it’s a fictional aircraft… Upper basic colors are Humbrol 31 (RAF Slate Grey) and 160 (German Camouflage Red Brown), while the undersides became French Dark Blue Grey (ModelMaster Authentics 2105). The result looks rather odd…
Representing a combat-worn aircraft, I applied a thorough black ink wash and did heavier panel shading and dry-brushing on the leading edges, along with some visible touches of aluminum.
The Hellenic roundels come from a TL Modellbau aftermarket sheet. The tactical code was puzzled together from single letters, and the Greek “D” was created from single decal strips. For better contrast I used white decals – most Hellenic aircraft of the time had black codes, but the contrast is much better, and I found evidence that some machines actually carried white codes. The small fin flash is another free interpretation. Not every Hellenic aircraft carried these markings, and instead of painting the whole rudder in Greek colors I just applied a small fin flash. This was created with white and blue decal strips, closely matching the roundels’ colors.
Finally, after some soot stains around the guns and the exhausts, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Modified beyond recognition, perhaps…? The fictional Gloster Glaive looks IMHO good and very modern, just like one of those final biplane designs that were about to be outrun by monoplanes at the brink of WWII.
for 'Yes, It Was Quite the Freckle Party'.
This will be 'Ruin's Altarpiece', we will all get one. Marcel's, James', Falstaff's, and Rack's and Rrose's altarpieces are already done.
These are really more 'Cast List' photographs than anything.
Having almost run out of walls, and having already begun on floor pieces, I console myself with the idea that there are always ceilings, waving at Tiepolo here.
I never thought I would stretch a new canvas. I have been working on top of old canvasses, old work, to date here, saving me from the callouses usually earned in the canvas stretching process. This time, I started from scratch. I was surprised, and happy, to find the energy, and the accompanying blisters.
Just goes to show...
You want to tell a story, you need first to delineate your characters. Tolstoy's list of characters at the beginning of 'War and Peace' was somewhat overawing, I remember the shock of wondering how they might be managed. None of them disappeared, each and every one became a world of their own.
This puts me in mind of how Tom Stoppard further animated those 'minor' characters in 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead', as if to say that there are no minor characters, turning Hamlet into a bothersome 'extra'. Clever Mr. Stoppard. Hamlet had his story, he could hover in the background, being generally menacing and monomaniacal for a while.
The Silverfish and Alfred Jarry are equals, this can be extrapolated towards 'happy ever after', forever and ever, or not, this can happen to everything and everyone, even. The 'fabric' and the 'means' are large enough.
Imagine, for example, Donald, Xi, and Vladimir discussing living to 150, or indefinitely, on an open mic. Then extrapolate. Stories are handed to us. What would they look like, and by extension, what would we look like?
I guess it's why we generate satire, something that helps us represent the unthinkable, to give it representation without describing those who don't deserve description.
Jarry did this with UBU. It's no wonder he inspired both Marcel and James, and Ruin too, of course. Ubu will have his altar along with the others.
Some altarpieces are cautionary tales we tell each other, some are so inflammatory that they might be best kept in the oral tradition.
It's all about the story, I guess, that infinite space between both sides of the same sheet of paper.
We all have 'nascent' stories. Some emerge, some don't, but a cast of characters is a good(-ish) beginning.
another shot taken at Himeji Castle. I can imagine living in such a huge Castle, one's life will probably revolve around it. If you extrapolate this to our lives, our workplace, our country, I think it is crucial for us to always do and know more than just our own area. learn, so that we can see and feel the light and not just experience it through the windows.
This shot, peering inside the frilly folds of a bearded iris flower, is part of a series that I am building up over time (i.e., a polite way of saying over a period of a year or two). I marvel at the multitude of colors, textures, forms, etc. The back-lighting in this example from the gardens at our apartment complex was a special treat.
Barton, ACT, Australia.
iPhone 5s - Photograph taken with the camera on an iPhone 5s.
Camera - The native camera app was used without the HDR option to capture the image.
Handy Photo - Used the Magic Crop tool to extrapolate beyond the the image boundaries.
Snapseed - Image straightened (rotated).
Handy Photo - Retouched a small cobweb and some bright dirt specks from the petals.
Snapseed - Image cropped to square format.
Big Photo - Image re-sized to 2448 x 2448 pixels.
Snapseed - Applied the Structure and Ambience filters. Applied Overall lighting adjustments.
ExifEditor - EXIF data from the original photograph transferred to the final image.
(Filed as 201410??_iPadMiniRetina ??? HandyPhoto-Snapseed-BigPhoto-ExifEditor.JPG)
The incumbent and the wannabe flapping in the westerly wind at the Levin Bowling Club.
INFORMAL SURVEY BACKS FLAG CONFUSION CLAIM
A "man-in-the-street'' survey conducted by a retired Dunedin academic has found 90% of respondents have trouble recognising the difference between the Australian and the New Zealand flags.
Former University of Otago information science lecturer Dr Colin Aldridge said his informal survey was far from scientifically robust, but published his findings anyway, because he was surprised at how many New Zealanders failed to recognise their own flag.
Dr Aldridge conducted the survey in Dunedin, Hastings and Havelock North during the Christmas-New Year holiday period, approaching pedestrians and showing them images of the proposed alternative New Zealand flag as Flag A, and the Australian flag as Flag B.
He then asked: "Which of these would you choose for the New Zealand flag?''
"Only 10% of those approached recognised the Australian flag for what it was.
"The 90% that didn't notice is not a number you can trust, speaking as a scientist. It should raise significant doubt.
"But I published the results because it's relevant to the current debate that a lot of people have difficulty distinguishing the New Zealand flag from the Australian flag.
"If I had put the Union Jack or the [Canadian] maple leaf or a few other distinctive flags, then there wouldn't have been any doubt about it in people's minds.
"They would have said: You're showing the Union Jack, why are you doing this?''
Dr Aldridge said the confusion between the New Zealand and Australian flags was a long-standing problem, and the results of his survey showed it was continuing.
The informal survey also found Dunedin respondents were the most observant, 16% of them recognising the Australian flag.
"In Havelock North, 11% correctly identified it, while in Hastings, only 4% did. The latter seemed to have a higher proportion of non-New Zealanders, though.''
Overall, 43% of respondents chose the proposed flag and 46% chose the Australian flag.
He said Dunedin was the most conservative. Only 27% of respondents selected the proposed flag.
In Hastings, nearly half of the respondents chose the new flag, and in Havelock North, 62% chose the new flag.
Dr Aldridge said he would personally like to see a new flag raised in New Zealand.
University of Otago Mathematics and Statistics Department head Prof Richard Barker said only 252 people responded to the survey, so they could not be regarded as a representative sample of New Zealanders.
"It was not robust in that sense.
"The methodology is such, that it cannot be regarded as a scientific poll.
"Strictly, these views can be taken only as the opinions of those sampled and can't be reliably extrapolated to the whole population.''
Prof Barker described the survey as "anecdotal'' and believed the statistics should be left for Otago Daily Times readers to decide for themselves, whether they were to be trusted or not.
The proposed new flag is now flying alongside the present New Zealand flag on the Auckland Harbour Bridge until March 24, when the flag referendum will be complete.
Deputy Prime Minister Bill English said it was one of more than 250 sites around the country to fly the flag.
"Having the two flags flying side by side around New Zealand will help people compare the designs before making a decision in the final flag referendum, which runs from March 3 to March 24.'' - Otago Daily News 26/1/2016
CURRENT FLAG GETS THUMBS UP
January 30, 2016
The New Zealand flag will continue to be the New Zealand flag after the flag change referendum, and by a considerable margin if the Herald web poll this week is an indicator.
The question asked was “Which flag do you intend to vote for in the referendum?”
The current New Zealand flag attracted 61 percent support (275 votes out of the 444 people who responded).
The alternative black and blue silver fern flag had 32 percent support (146) and 5 percent (23) of respondents were undecided.
THOSE AGAINST
“There is nothing wrong with the original flag,” said one supporter of the existing flag.
“My grandfather fought for that flag in the war and it would not do his memory and all the other soldiers justice for the flag to be changed. We should be proud of what it stands for.”
“A total waste of our time and money changing the flag,” said another.
“Is the Government wanting to change the flag to keep certain people in this country happy?”
Others in favour of the status quo said “Why change it!!”
“I’m gutted Red Peak didn’t make it and can’t stand the silver fern one.
“It doesn’t even look like a flag. Badly designed and it would be embarrassing I think to have it as a flag.
“So I’d rather we keep the current one and vote again a few years down the track with some better options available.”
“Unless the newer design reflects the history of our country, including those who went to war and fought for king and country, I prefer not to change a thing.
“To me the original holds more mana than that of the black and blue silver fern.”
“The alternative is a poor choice for a new flag. It’s a shameless attack on our national sovereignty.”
“If it had been Kiwis proposing the idea of a new flag instead of John Key saying 'you guys should have a new flag', I would be more on board.”
Those in favour of the alternative flag put it this way:
“I’ve already bought one.
“Whether it wins or not, it’s now flying on my rooftop balcony here in Patterson Lakes, Victoria, where it can be seen for miles.”
Another said “Britain long ago cut the apron strings.
“It is time for us to stand on our own two feet and be proud of our new status.”
“I was quite happy with the old one but we have spent so much money sorting out the change, we might as well have the new one. I do like it better though.”
“Time for a change. The Canadian maple flag is very popular!”
One of the undecided put it this way: “These polls are not a true reflection of how the public feel, given the low numbers which are statistically flawed.”
Another said “I would prefer the silver fern was put on the existing flag or the union jack on the silver fern flag.”
“Neither — just an exercise in nationalism, thanks John Key!” - Gisborne Herald
TYPE HISTORY
When it flew its Model 367-80 ‘Dash 80’ prototype for the first time on July 15, 1954, Boeing hoped the aircraft would take the airlines by storm. Extrapolating technology used on the B-47 and B-52 jet bombers, the aircraft represented a quantum leap directly into the jet age compared to the company’s piston-engined Model 367 Stratocruiser. With its swept wing and fourjet powerplant, carried in discrete underwing nacelles, the Dash 80 was the most modern commercial transport available.
Yet the airlines were left unimpressed and it was the US Air Force, realising it needed a jet tanker to support its jet bombers, that saw the Dash 80 into production. In September 1955 it ordered its first KC-135A Stratotanker, Boeing modifying the Dash 80 to trial a ‘flying boom’ refuelling system. The Stratotanker entered service on June 28, 1957 and Boeing continued development along this military line under the company designation Model 717.
The airlines had been unimpressed by the Dash 80’s cabin width, which was too narrow for six-abreast seating, and Boeing therefore returned to the Dash 80 concept, widening the cabin and developing a series of successful airliners as the Model 707.
Boeing built 732 KC-135s in different variants, many of them ultimately re-engined with the modern CFM56 turbofan, known as the F108 in military service. These aircraft are designated KC-135R. There was also a line of C-135 transports, EC-135 command posts, RC-135 intelligence gatherers and a host of other variants, with the KC and RC remaining in widespread service.
Developed under Boeing’s Model 739 series, the first of a long line of RC-135 variants was ordered in 1962. This photographic reconnaissance RC-135A entered service during the mid-1960s, followed by the first of the electronic intelligence gatherers, the RC-135B. The precedent for modifying KC airframes to RC standard was set in 1972, with the conversion of three KC-135As as RC-135Ds for the Rivet Brass mission. All subsequent RC variants were produced by conversion/upgrade, mostly from C, KC and RC standards, culminating in the RC-135V and RC-135W, operated under the Rivet Joint codename that has become internationally, and officially recognised in USAF parlance, as the type’s name.
In June 2011, 51 Sqn flew the final BAe Nimrod R.Mk 1 sortie of its 37-year association with the type. Plans were under way for the aircraft’s replacement under a project known as Airseeker, which had begun the previous March. It envisaged the acquisition of three RC-135W Rivet Joint aircraft for delivery from 2013. The machines were to be converted from USAF KC-135R airframes and L-3 Communications in Greenville, Texas was chosen to perform the work as the USAF’s experienced Rivet Joint contractor. The work began in March 2011.
On November 12, 2013, No. 51 Sqn took delivery of the UK’s first Rivet Joint, operating its maiden operational sortie on May 23, 2014. The second aircraft arrived in August 2015 and the third on June 8, 2017. For the purposes of sensor and system upgrades, the trio are considered an extension of the USAF Rivet Joint fleet, ensuring they remain at the cutting edge of capability.
Rivet Joint has been deployed extensively for Operation Shader and on other operational taskings. It had been formally named Airseeker, but is almost universally known in service as the RC-135W Rivet Joint.
here’s a house. or an almost house. which led me to ask some questions:
is it being built or deconstructed?
what utility does it have in it’s extant form?
when we look at it are we seeing it for what it is or what it represents in terms of potential?
how do we overlook what it actually is (a bunch of wood, cobbled together) and only see what it represents (a potentially finished house)?
what amazing cognition is involved in extrapolating from a bunch of wood into a finished house?
does it have aesthetic merit in it’s extant form, and if so what?
etc.
see ‘7’.
it’s an interesting challenge, i think, to see this construction for what it is, divorced of any potential infused future utility.... tmblr.co/ZHkOLwmUDBk1
MAVEN propellent tank prior to installation into MAVEN spacecraft core at Lockheed Martin in Denver.
Credit: Lockheed Martin
=============
The goal of the Mars Atmosphere And Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN) program is to determine the role that loss of atmospheric gas to space played in changing the Martian climate through time. MAVEN will determine how much of the Martian atmosphere has been lost over time by measuring the current rate of escape to space and gathering enough information about the relevant processes to allow extrapolation backward in time.
MAVEN's principal investigator is based at the University of Colorado at Boulder's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics. The university will provide science operations, build instruments, and lead Education/Public Outreach. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, will manage the MAVEN mission and provide instruments. Lockheed Martin of Littleton, Colo., will build the spacecraft and perform mission operations. The University of California-Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory will build instruments for the mission. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., will provide Program management via the Mars Program Office, as well as navigation support, the Deep Space Network, and the Electra telecommunications relay hardware and operations.
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center enables NASA’s mission through four scientific endeavors: Earth Science, Heliophysics, Solar System Exploration, and Astrophysics. Goddard plays a leading role in NASA’s accomplishments by contributing compelling scientific knowledge to advance the Agency’s mission.
Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Find us on Instagram
[taken from jediimperialarchives.com]
- This time Hasbro presents collectors with the 187th Legion Galactic Marine. Although just like the standard 187th Legion Clone Trooper, the Galactic Marine can’t be sourced to any official Expanded Universe source as it’s a Hasbro concept. Thankfully that doesn’t make him any less cool of a Galactic Marine. While some collectors feel it’s a big stretch that every clone “type” appears in the same color flashes as the standard clone troopers, we think the extrapolation is quite curious and downright believable.
187th "Windu" Galactic Marine
Decal ID# 2770
Helmet: LEGO snow trooper
Helmet Decal: None
Head: Black
*Shown here in metallic purple
Pauldron: MMCB "Windu Marine" set *special requested set
Torso: White
Arms: White
Hands: Black
Kama: MMCB "Windu trooper" set. *special requested set
Waist: Black
Legs: White
+++ 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 Gloster Glaive was basically a modernized and re-engined variant of the successful, British-built Gloster Gladiator (or Gloster SS.37), the RAF’s final biplane fighter to enter service. The Gladiator was not only widely used by the RAF at the dawn of WWII and in almost every theatre of operations, but also by many other nations. Operators included Norway, Belgium, Sweden, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania or Nationalist China, and while the RAF already opted for more modern monoplanes, Gloster saw the opportunity to sell an updated Gladiator to countries which were not as progressive.
Originally designated Gladiator Mk. IV, the machine received many aerodynamic refinements and the motor was changed from a draggy radial to a liquid-cooled inline engine. The latter was the new Rolls Royce Peregrine, a development of the Kestrel. It was, in its original form, a 21-litre (1,300 cu in) liquid-cooled V-12 aero engine ), delivering 885-horsepower (660 kW). The engine was housed under a streamlined cowling, driving a three blade metal propeller, and was coupled with a ventral radiator bath, reminiscent of the Hawker Fury biplane’s arrangement.
Structural improvements included an all-metal monocoque fuselage and stabilizers, as well as new wings and streamlined struts with reduced bracing. The upper wing was enlarged and of all-metal construction, too, while the lower wings were reduced in span and area, almost resulting in a sesquiplane layout. The total wing area was only marginally reduced, though.
The fixed landing gear was retained, but the main wheels were now covered with spats. The pilot still sat in a fully enclosed cockpit, the armament consisted of four machine guns, similar to the Gladiator. But for the Glaive, all Browning machine guns were synchronized and mounted in the fuselage: one pair was placed on top of the cowling, in front of the cockpit. Another pair, much like the Gladiator’s arrangement was placed in the fuselage flanks, below the exhaust outlets.
Compared with the Gladiator, the design changes were so fundamental that Gloster eventually decided to allocate a separate designation – also with a view to the type’s foreign marketing, since a new aircraft appeared more attractive than another mark of a pre-war design. For the type’s virgin flight in late 1938 the name “Glaive” was unveiled to the public, and several smaller European air forces immediately showed interest, including Greece, Croatia, Turkey, Portugal and Egypt.
Greece was one of the initial customers, and the first of a total of 24 aircraft for the Hellenic Air Force was delivered in early 1939, with 24 more on order (which were never delivered, though). The initial batch arrived just in time, since tension had been building between Greece and Italy since 7 April 1939, when Italian troops occupied Albania. On 28 October 1940, Italy issued an ultimatum to Greece, which was promptly rejected. A few hours later, Italian troops launched an invasion of Greece, initiating the Greco-Italian War.
The Hellenic Gloster Glaives were split among three Mirae Dioxeos (Fighter Squadrons): the 21st at Trikala, 22nd at Thessaloniki and 23rd at Larissa. When Italy attacked in October 1940, the British fighter was, together with the PZL 24, the Greeks' only modern type in adequate numbers. However, by late 1940, the Gloster Glaive was already no longer a front-runner despite a powerful powerplant and satisfactory armament. It had no speed advantage over the Fiat Cr.42 nor could it outfly the nimble Italian biplane, and it was much slower than the Macchi MC.200 and the Fiat G.50 it was pitted against. Its agility was the only real advantage against the Italian fighters, whose reliance on the slow firing Breda-SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns proved detrimental.
Anyway, on 5 April 1941, German forces invaded Greece and quickly established air superiority. As the Allied troops retreated, British and Hellenic forces covered them, before flying to Crete during the last week of April. There, the refugee aircraft recorded a few claims over twin-engine aircraft before being evacuated to Egypt during the Battle of Crete.
Overall, the Glaives performed gallantly during the early period of the conflict, holding their own against impossible numerical odds and despite the fact that their main target were enemy bombers which forced them to fight at a disadvantage against enemy fighters. Italian claims of easy superiority over the Albanian front were vastly over-rated and their kill claims even exceeded the total number of operational fighters on the Greek side. Total Greek fighter losses in combat came to 24 a/c with the Greek fighter pilots claiming 64 confirmed kills and 24 probables (about two third bombers).
By April 1941, however, lack of spares and attrition had forced the Hellenic Air Force to merge the surviving seven Glaives with five leftover PZL.24s into one understrength squadron supported by five Gloster Gladiators Mk I & II and the two surviving MB.151s. These fought hopelessly against the Luftwaffe onslaught, and most aircraft were eventually lost on the ground. None of the Hellenic Gloster Glaives survived the conflict.
General characteristics:
Crew: two
Length: 8.92m (29 ft 3 in)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 11 ft 9 in (3.58 m)
Wing area: 317 ft² (29.4 m²)
Empty weight: 1,295 kg (2,855 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,700 kg (3,748 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Rolls Royce Peregrine II liquid-cooled V12 inline engine, rated at 940 hp (700 kw)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 405 km/h (252 mph; 219 kn) at 4,400 m (14,436 ft)
Cruise speed: 345 km/h (214 mph; 186 kn)
Stall speed: 60 mph (52 knots, 96 km/h)
Range: 373 mi (600 km; 324 nmi)
Endurance: 2 hours
Service ceiling: 10,600 m (34,800 ft)
Rate of climb: 2,982 ft/min (15.15 m/s)
Time to altitude: 10.000 ft (3.050 m) in 3 minutes 20 seconds
Armament:
4× 0.303 calibre (7.7 mm) M1919 Browning machine guns in the fuselage
Provisions for 6× 10 kg (22 lb) or 4x 20 kg (44 lb) bombs under the lower wings
The kit and its assembly:
The fictional Gloster Glaive started quite simple with the idea of replacing the Gladiator’s radial with an inline engine. But this soon did not appear enough for an update – the Peregrine hardly delivered much more power than the former Mercury, so I considered some structural updates, too. Most of them comprised the replacement of former fabric-covered structures, and this led conceptually to a kitbash with only some Gladiator fuselage and tail parts left.
The basis is (once more) the very nice Matchbox Gloster Gladiator, but it was heavily modified. As an initial step, fuselage, fin and stabilizers (all OOB parts) lost their rib-and-fabric structure, simply sanded away. A minor detail, but it changes the overall look of the aircraft a lot, making it appear much more modern.
The fuselage was left without the OOB radial, and instead a leftover Merlin front end from an Airfix Hurricane (ca. 1cm long, left over from one of my first whif builds ever, a Hurricane with a radial engine!) was added. The lines match pretty well: the side profile looks sleek, if not elegant, but the Gladiator fuselage turned out to be wider than expected. Some major body work/PSR was necessary to integrate the new nose, but the result looks very good.
The liquid-cooled engine necessitated a radiator somewhere on the airframe…! Since I wanted the nose to remain slim and streamlined I eventually placed the radiator bath under the fuselage, much like the arrangement of the Hawker Fury biplane. The radiator itself comes from a late Spitfire (FROG kit).
The exhaust was taken from the Hurricane kit, too, and matching slits dug into the putty nose to take them. The three blade propeller is a mash-up, too: the spinner belongs, IIRC, to an early Spitfire (left over from an AZ Models kit) while the blades came from a damaged Matchbox Brewster Buffalo.
The Gladiator’s fuselage flank machine guns were kept and their “bullet channels” extrapolated along the new cowling, running under the new exhaust pipes. Another pair of machine guns were placed on top of the engine – for these, openings were carved into the upper hull and small fairings (similar to the Browning guns in the flanks) added. This arrangement appeared plausible to me, since the Gladiator’s oil cooler was not necessary anymore and the new lower wings (see below) were not big enough anymore to take the Gladiator’s underwing guns. Four MGs in the fuselage appears massive – but there were other types with such an arrangement, e.g. the Avia B-534 with four guns in the flanks and an inline engine.
The wings are complete replacements: the upper wing comes from a Heller Curtiss SBC4, while the lower wings as well as the spats (on shortened OOB Gladiator struts) come from an ICM Polikarpov I-153. All struts were scratched. Once the lower wings were in place and the relative position of the upper wing clear, the outer struts were carved from 1mm styrene sheet, using the I-153 design as benchmark. These were glued to the lower wing first, and, once totally dry after 24h, the upper wing was simply glued onto the top and the wing position adjusted. This was left to dry another 24h, and as a final step the four struts above the cowling (using the OOB struts, but as single parts and trimmed for proper fit) were placed. This way, a stable connection is guaranteed – and the result is surprisingly sturdy.
Rigging was done with heated sprue material – my personal favorite for this delicate task, and executed before painting the kit started so that the glue could cure and bond well.
Painting and markings:
The reason why this aircraft ended in Greek service is a color photograph of a crashed Hellenic Bloch M.B. 152 (coded ‘D 177’, to be specific). I guess that the picture was post-colored, though, because the aircraft of French origin sports rather weird colors: the picture shows a two-tone scheme in a deep, rather reddish chestnut brown and a light green that almost looks like teal. Unique, to say the least... Underside colors couldn’t be identified with certainty in the picture, but appeared like a pale but not too light blue grey.
Anyway, I assume that these colors are pure fiction and exaggerated Photoshop work, since the few M.B. 152s delivered to Greece carried AFAIK standard French camouflage (in French Khaki, Chestnut Brown and Blue-Grey on the upper surfaces, and a very light blue-grey from below). I’d assume that the contrast between the grey and green tones was not very obvious in the original photograph, so that the artist, not familiar with WWII paint schemes, replaced both colors with the strange teal tone and massively overmodulated the brown.
As weird as it looked, I liked this design and used it as an inspirational benchmark for my Hellenic Glaive build. After all, it’s a fictional aircraft… Upper basic colors are Humbrol 31 (RAF Slate Grey) and 160 (German Camouflage Red Brown), while the undersides became French Dark Blue Grey (ModelMaster Authentics 2105). The result looks rather odd…
Representing a combat-worn aircraft, I applied a thorough black ink wash and did heavier panel shading and dry-brushing on the leading edges, along with some visible touches of aluminum.
The Hellenic roundels come from a TL Modellbau aftermarket sheet. The tactical code was puzzled together from single letters, and the Greek “D” was created from single decal strips. For better contrast I used white decals – most Hellenic aircraft of the time had black codes, but the contrast is much better, and I found evidence that some machines actually carried white codes. The small fin flash is another free interpretation. Not every Hellenic aircraft carried these markings, and instead of painting the whole rudder in Greek colors I just applied a small fin flash. This was created with white and blue decal strips, closely matching the roundels’ colors.
Finally, after some soot stains around the guns and the exhausts, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Modified beyond recognition, perhaps…? The fictional Gloster Glaive looks IMHO good and very modern, just like one of those final biplane designs that were about to be outrun by monoplanes at the brink of WWII.