View allAll Photos Tagged methodical

Catacombs, Montparnasse, Paris

 

I decided that today was a day for going underground, and I set off to Montparnasse to visit the catacombs. These are a vast maze of tunnels under Paris originally used for quarrying the stone out of which the city's main buildings are constructed. In the late 18th Century, the state of the city's churchyards had become so disgusting that the city removed the bones from all of them. They were brought here at night, the carts coming from the centre of the city accompanied by torch-bearing acolytes and priests chanting the requiem Mass. A skull count showed that almost six million corpses were removed in this way. They were buried deep underground, but these people being Parisians the skulls and bones were arranged in a neat and methodical way, a meaningful chaos. Layers of tibia and femurs are crowned by a layer of pelvises and skulls, and so on. Each churchyard was grouped together, and a plaque shows which parish provided the skeletons.

 

The work was interrupted by the French Revolution,which provided plenty more corpses for when the work was resumed. Altogether about a kilometre and a half of tunnels were filled with the remains of dead Parisians, and you can walk through them on a winding route under the streets around Montparnasse station. In fact, this is just a tiny fraction of the tunnels. The catacombs extend for hundreds of kilometres under the city, many of them rarely explored and difficult of access. Because of this, they are regularly broken into by intrepid adventurers, and many legends have grown up about parts of the network. However, my favourite story is one which is true.

 

In 2004, a group of police cadets on a training exercise were given the task of tracking an imaginary criminal in a part of the network which was little known. They got into the system through a manhole, and when they were about a hundred feet underground something rather odd happened. They triggered a motion sensor which set off the sound of barking dogs. Thinking that it was part of the exercise, they headed onwards only to come out into a vast cavern which had been fully equipped as a cinema. An anteroom had been equipped and fully stocked as a bar, and there was also a film storage room. When the cadets reported what they had seen, the electricity board were sent in to work out where the invaders were getting their electricity from. Instead, they found the wires all cut, the equipment removed, and a sign saying 'Don't try to follow us. You'll never find us.'

 

Perhaps the cineastes had got fed up with waiting to get into the system officially, because this was the only place all week that I encountered a serious queue. Worse, I was just in front of a small group of people who talked constantly in very loud voices. She was an American who obviously lived in Paris, and they appeared to be young relatives who'd come to stay. She was taking them down the catacombs, and the price to be paid for this by the poor kids was to suffer her pretentious nonsense. She went on about spirituality, and homeopathy, and psychoanalysis, and the inner energy, and so on. Fair play to the kids, they responded enthusiastically enough.

 

And then she got out some of her stream of consciousness poetry, and started reading it in a loud voice. Well, goodness me. I was put in mind of something the graphic artist Alan Moore said when he was in Hollywood helping turn his 'V for Vendetta' into a film, and he was asked at a director's lunch why he lived in Northampton, England. "Because it keeps me grounded", he replied, and I thought that this was exactly right. It was like the opposite of this pompous woman, although to be fair to her I expect that if I went to live in Paris I would also disappear up my own backside.

 

The catacombs are brilliant, worth every minute of the queuing time, worth every insufferable stream of consciousness adjective. And then I went and did some shopping.

 

You can read my account of my travels at pariswander.blogspot.co.uk.

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/400 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:48 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/500 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:43 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/320 and Focal Length of 70.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:39 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/500 and Focal Length of 70.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:26 EST PM

Othmarhof

Object ID: 32939 Herzoggasse 1

1564-1569 built three-wing Renaissance building with sgraffito facade

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_denkmalgesch%C3%BCtzten_O...

 

(further information you can get by clicking on the link at the end of page!)

History

 

Plaque to the founder of the Hyrtl'schen orphanage Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel

© IMAREAL / E. Vavra

The Biedermeier-influenced city on the edge of the Vienna Woods is the capital of the district Mödling in the south of Vienna. The town has experienced in its 1100-year history since the first mention very different phases: in the Middle Ages briefly Babenberg residence, for centuries an economically potent wine market, from the 19th Century summer resort and industrial center, since 1875 town, in the 20th Century for almost two decades XXIVth district of Vienna, since 1954 again an independent municipality of Lower Austria and as a school and garden city popular residential area in the vicinity of Vienna.

Mödling has partnerships with cities in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy.

The historical tradition of Mödling goes back far beyond the first written mention, how settlement finds from the Neolithic Age, Hallstatt period (eg calendar mountain) and Roman times as well as the great Avar burial ground "at the Golden Staircase" from the 7/8th Century BCE prove. In the year 903 Mödling is first mentioned (Medilihha). The later settlement was probably made in the 11th Century beneath an early castle building on the church mountain (Kirchenberg), where later a Romanesque predecessor of Othmar church was built.

In the late 12th century Mödling was for a few decades the residence of a Babenberg branch line. Henry the Elder, a brother of Duke Leopold V., had since the 1170 century belongings in and around Mödling. He and his son Henry the Younger, calling himself "Duke of Mödling", resided on the castle probably built around 1150 in the Klausen, among whose most famous visitors was Walther von der Vogelweide. With the death of Henry the Younger in 1236 extinguished the Mödlinger line of the Babenberg and the reign became princely domain. The time of the Babenberg commemorates the in late 12th Century built Romanesque ossuary at Othmar church - a circular building with an apse - as well as the denomination "Babenberg".

In the late Middle Ages, Medlich developed into a major wine market (1343 mention of market town) which in the 15th Century as one of the four princely spell markets was also represented in the Parliament - in addition to Gumpoldskirchen, Langenlois and Perchtoldsdorf. For centuries shaped the wine-growing the economy and social structure. The Mödlinger wine was good and helped the market particularly in the 15th and 16th Century to its prosperity. The settlement reached at the end of the Middle Ages that extent, which until the 19th Century should remain essentially unchanged. The center formed ​​the area around the Schrannenplatz with a dense stand of late medieval and early modern town houses that bear evidence of the wealth and self-confidence of the citizens of the market town. From the late medieval Schrannen building, the official residence of the market judge, was created in 1548 the representative Renaissance town hall with loggia.

The elevated lying Othmar church became in the 15th Century by transferring the rights of the church of St. Martin parish church of Mödling. The massive late Gothic church was built in a nearly 70-year construction period from 1454 to 1523 on the walls of six predecessors and able to resist fortified. As Mödling was destroyed in 1529 by the Ottomans, the just completed church lost its roof and remained for over a century till the restoration in 1660/70 a ruin. On the Merian engraving from 1649 the uncovered Othmar church on the left side is clearly visible. As a temporary parish church served the about 1450 built late-Gothic hospital church.

The internal conditions at this time were mainly marked of the clashes of the market with the princely rule Burg Mödling - since 1558 combined with the rule of Liechtenstein - which reached its climax in 1600 under the energetic administrator Georg Wiesing (1593-1611). During the Reformation, the market largely became Protestant. In the course of recatholicization a Capuchin monastery was founded in 1631, which served as a factory after the repeal under Joseph II and was then bought by the Thonet family (so-called Thonet Schlössel, today Bezirksmuseum).

In Türkenjahr 1683 (besiegement of the Turks) took place in the Othmar church a horrific bloodbath, in which hundreds of people who had sought refuge there were killed. The church was destroyed again, but this time built up rapidly with the market judge Wolfgang Ignaz Viechtl in a few years.

End of the 18th Century occurred in Mödling the settlement of industrial enterprises, especially textile mills that took advantage of the cheaper production possibilities and also its proximity to Vienna. Was decisively shaped the character of the place but by the rise to a summer resort, initiated by Prince Johann I of Liechtenstein beginning of the 19th Century, which acquired in 1807 the rule of Liechtenstein-Mödling with the former family ancestral home. He had the area under enormous cost reforested (Schirmföhren/pinus mugo, acacia, etc.) and transformed to a public park in Romantic style with promenade paths, steep paths and artificial constructions (Black tower, amphitheater, Husarentempel). The ruined castles Mödling and Liechtenstein were restored. The former Liechtenstein'sche landscape park is considered a remarkable example of the garden culture in 1800 and is now a popular tourist destination (1974 Natural Preserve Föhrenberge).

Since the Biedermeier Mödling in the summer was an extremely popular artist hangout. Among the most famous artists of the 19th Century who were inspired by the romantic nature here, were Franz Schubert, Franz Grillparzer, Ferdinand Waldmüller, Ferdinand Raimund and Ludwig van Beethoven, who here worked on one of his major works, the "Missa Solemnis". In the 20th Century settled inter alia Arnold Schönberg, Anton von Webern, Anton Wildgans, Franz Theodor Csokor and Albert Drach temporarily or permanently down. To Beethoven, Schönberg and Wildgans memorials have been established (Beethoven House, Schönberg House, Wildgans archive).

In the second half of the 19th Century Mödling became administrative center (District Court, District administration) and an industrial site and educational location with high schools and colleges (eg educational establishment Francisco-Josephinum). The good traffic situation at the southern railway, the progressive industrialization and the expansion of health facilities (park, Kursalon) led to a rapid expansion of the hitherto for centuries unchanged market. Under mayor Joseph Schöffel (1873-1882), who became famous because of his successful engagement against the deforestation of the Vienna Woods as the "savior of the Vienna Woods", followed the methodical installation of the so-called Schoeffel(before) city - Schöffelvorstadt (New Mödling) east of the Southern Railway and the establishment of workers' settlements. Later followed the exclusive residential areas of the turn of the century with their representative residential buildings. Probably the most important building of the late 19th Century is the Hyrtl'sche orphanage (1886-1889), founded by the Viennese anatomist, Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel. The Orphanage church St. Joseph was built on the in 1787 demolished Martin Church.

On 18th November 1875 the emerging market town was raised to the status of a city, two years later the incorporation of Klausen and Vorderbrühl took place. Through the establishment of Great-Vienna under the Nazi regime on 15th October 1938 the young city for 16 years lost its municipal autonomy; 1954 it became again a part of Lower Austria.

Symbol for the characteristic environment of Mödling was the "width pine" on the Anninger whose age goes back to the 16th Century (around 1550). It was a well-known natural landmark and has become the symbol of the city. 1988 died the tree and it had to be removed in 1997 for safety reasons. The remains are now in the Lower Austrian Provincial Museum.

geschichte.landesmuseum.net/index.asp?contenturl=http://g...

A column of M4 Vangurds approach a destroyed PT-76.

 

The Battle of the Agrotech Facility occurred during the 2240s African Conflict, centering on a critical agricultural research installation in a member country of the United African States (UAS). In early March 2245, UAS forces repurposed the facility, turning it into a staging ground. In response, the United States initiated a tactical operation to neutralize the stronghold.

Commencing on March 15, 2245, U.S. unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) conducted precision strikes, systematically targeting and destroying UAS ground positions and infrastructure within the facility. Following the aerial assault, U.S. ground troops advanced into the area on March 18, encountering pockets of UAS resistance. The operation involved close-quarters combat, with U.S. forces methodically clearing the facility’s complex layout. After several days of intense fighting, the remaining UAS defenders were subdued, and control of the Agrotech Facility was reestablished by March 21, 2245.

 

Probably my biggest render yet, tho I got bored midway and unfortunately rushed it. Much inspiration came from the battlefield renewal map. Credit for pt-76 goes to @y.n.r.y

CANOGA PARK- The Los Angeles Fire Department battled a Major Emergency Structure Fire in the west San Fernando Valley on Monday, October 18, 2021.

 

The fire at 8423 Canoga Avenue in Canoga Park, was first noted at 12:18 PM by an LAFD Paramedic Ambulance crew returning from a nearby emergency. Within moments of their reporting the fire, flames were through the roof of the 125' x 125' one-story industrial building that also housed an adjoining but unrelated business at 8425 Canoga Avenue.

 

As that first-arriving LAFD Paramedic crew circled the structure to gain situational awareness and guide fellow responders, they encountered the first of three adult male civilians with severe burn injuries outside the burning building. Two proved to be in critical condition and the other in serious condition. All three were taken to area hospitals. Sadly, one of the critically injured men died later while undergoing hospital care.

 

The rapid spread of intense flames and multiple explosions heard within the building guided first-arriving firefighters to quickly commence defensive operations, applying multiple large diameter hose streams from the exterior, including two from atop extended aerial ladders, to prevent flames from extending beyond the well involved structure.

 

With the exception of a forty square-foot section of the roof at 8427 Canoga Avenue destroyed by surface fire, the tactics proved successful in holding the blaze to the pair of unrelated businesses under one roof at 8423 and 8425 Canoga Avenue.

 

It took 150 Los Angeles Firefighter just 75 minutes to extinguish the flames.

 

Firefighters remained active through the night extinguishing hotspots and minimizing hazards at the structurally compromised building with the help of LAFD's robotic firefighting vehicle and heavy equipment.

 

At daylight Tuesday, LAFD crews resumed a systematic search within the largely destroyed premises. During their methodical search among tons of burnt debris inside the structure, firefighters discovered the remains of an adult male, bringing the overall patient count to four, with a total of two deceased and two remaining hospitalized.

 

No other injuries were reported.

 

Scientific testing of materials inside the building of fire origin yielded positive results for hemp, and it appears that the operation inside involved the extraction from hemp, not dissimilar to that used in the Butane Honey Oil extraction process.

 

Though the business was a legal enterprise, the operation inside appeared to be illegal, as it did not adhere to established permitting processes and safety requirements.

 

Pursuant to protocol, the fire's cause remains the focus of a joint active investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Crime Task Force (L.A. Impact).

 

A positive identification of the dead men, as well as the cause, time and manner of their death will be determined by the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner.

 

© Photo by Brandon Taylor

 

LAFD Incident 101821-0791

 

Connect with us: LAFD.ORG | News | Facebook | Instagram | Reddit | Twitter: @LAFD @LAFDtalk

Ejection seat from the supersonic SR-71. The seat is of the variant designated C-2, which was used in the very early A-12 and SR-71 Blackbirds and is the only SR-71 ejection seat in private hands worldwide. First, a bit of history about this fantastic aircraft. The SR-71 is part of the family of aircraft known as the “Blackbirds,” which are stealth aircraft that were designed and produced by Lockheed’s Skunk Works and include the A-12 used by the CIA (13 made), the YF-12 interceptor used by the USAF (3 made), the M-21 used to launch a reconnaissance drone (2 made) and the SR-71, the USAF long range reconnaissance aircraft (32 made). In the late 1950s, the Soviet Union had protested overflights by subsonic American U-2 spy planes. In response, Lockheed's Skunk Works had developed the A-12 spy plane for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency; and in 1960 was awarded a contract to build 12 of these aircraft. The single seat A-12 featured a stealth design to minimize its radar cross-section, and was supersonic to overcome the weakness of the U-2’s vulnerability to surface to air missile attack. At the same time that Skunk Works was developing the A-12, the USAF was seeking a replacement for the F-106 Delta Dart. Skunk Works' Kelly Johnson proposed to the USAF a version of the A-12 called the AF-12. The USAF ordered three AF-12s in mid-1960 and these aircraft were the seventh through ninth A-12’s made. The Air Force version was longer and heavier than the CIA version of the A-12. Its fuselage was lengthened for additional fuel capacity to increase range and the cockpit was modified to add a second crew member to operate the fire control radar. The aircraft's nose was modified to accommodate the Hughes AN/ASG-18 fire-control radar originally developed for the XF-108; this modification changed the aircraft's aerodynamics enough to require ventral fins to be mounted under the fuselage and engine nacelles to maintain stability. Finally, four bays previously used to house the A-12's reconnaissance equipment were converted to carry Hughes AIM-47 Falcon (GAR-9) missiles and one bay was used for fire control equipment. The new USAF A-12 was designated the YF-12A interceptor, the first of which flew on August 7, 1963. After testing the three AF-12’s and realizing the potential of the A-12 design, in December 1962 the Air Force ordered a long-range strategic reconnaissance version of the A-12, which was designated the R-12 by Lockheed. Capable of flying at speeds over Mach 3.2 with a ceiling at 85,000 feet (and it still holds the record since 1976 as the fastest airplane ever built), it could evade missile attack by simply accelerating. Like the YF-12, the R-12’s fuselage was lengthened beyond the original A-12 configuration for additional fuel capacity to increase range, its cockpit included a second seat and the chines were reshaped. The aircraft’s reconnaissance equipment included signals intelligence sensors, a side-looking radar and a photo camera. Facing political pressure and claims that the U.S. was falling behind the Soviet Union in the research and development of new weapons systems, then-president Lyndon Johnson decided to publicly announce the YF-12A (which had served as cover for the still-secret A-12) and the Air Force reconnaissance model R-12. Air Force Chief of Staff General Curtis LeMay preferred the designation “SR (Strategic Reconnaissance”) for the new USAF aircraft and wanted the R-12 to be named SR-71. He lobbied to modify Johnson's speech to change the aircraft’s name to SR-71 and he was successful. This public announcement of the formerly secret program and the change to the aircraft’s designation came as a shock to Skunk Works and to Air Force personnel involved in the program. But the change to the aircraft’s designation was perceived as an order from the Commander-in-Chief; and accordingly, Skunk Works began reprinting over 29,000 blueprints for aircraft, retitled as "SR-71". Costing $33 million each, the first SR-71 entered service in 1966. Made primarily from titanium acquired from the USSR (Lockheed used subterfuge to prevent the Soviet government from knowing what the titanium was to be used for), the aircraft were painted a dark blue (almost black) to increase the transference of heat from the interior of the aircraft (the plane’s fuel was a heat sink for avionics cooling) and as camouflage against the night sky. The SR-71 was unofficially named the Blackbird, after BLACK SHIELD, the name for the A-12 missions in Vietnam and Southeast Asia based out of Okinawa Japan; and was also called the Habu by its crews, referring to an Okinawan species of pit viper. In 1968 the Blackbird program was cancelled and on February 5, 1968 Lockheed was ordered to destroy all the tooling for the A-12, YF-12, and SR-71 aircraft. But the SR-71 continued in service until 1990, by which time the Blackbird family of aircraft had completed 17,300 total sorties flown, 53,490 total flight hours and 11,675 hours of flight time at Mach 3. The SR-71 flew for 17 straight years (1972-1989) without a loss of plane or crew. Twelve of the 32 aircraft that were built were destroyed in accidents, though none were lost to enemy action. The aircraft was officially retired in 1990, but the lack of other resources to accomplish the reconnaissance needed by the US military prompted the Congress in 1994 to approve funds to bring three of these aircraft back out of retirement. They served the USAF until 1999 when the aircraft was finally retired for the last time. Although an aircraft manufacturer is responsible for ejection seat development as part of designing and building aircraft under government contracts, it is often sub-contracted to other companies that were more experienced in the industry. In the case of the SR-71, Lockheed turned to Stanley Aviation Corp. for the development of the ejection seat. Stanley had previously developed the B seat for the F 104 and the C-1 seat. Visually, the C-2 was very similar to the C-1, with a few notable differences. The foot rests were changed to remove the sides, and hinged to the bottom front edge of the seat bucket. Another quickly identifiable visual difference is the shape of the ejection pull handle, which was triangular on the C-1 where the C-2 used a 'D' shape (flat side down). This was done to give better grip from the pilot's hands and it would reduce the tendency to pull to one side if only one hand was used to initiate ejection. The automatic lap belt was also changed to a newer model. The parachute (BA-18 and -22) system of the C-2 included a lanyard activated timer mechanism to give some time for the seat to be clear prior to parachute deployment. The headrest was beefed up a little and a canopy breaker was attached to it. These features allowed for the foot retracts to work more reliably, the handle to be grabbed easier, and if the canopy failed to jettison, to eject through the glass. The other major change was of course to the XM10 rocket catapult for upward ejection. The C-2 style seat was ultimately replaced in 1967 / 1968 with the later SR-1 variant, which was designated the “RQ201”. Some of the noticeable differences between the SR-1 and the C-2 variants include the omission of the leg guards and arm restraint nets on the SR-1 which were used on the C-2, the secondary ejection handle has been relocated to the left side for the SR-1, the double-d ring is replaced with a single loop d-ring on the SR-1 and the seat bucket and headrest are shaped differently.

 

Methodical examination of part numbers on this seat by the consignor of this item, coupled with his extensive research and communication with experts and pilots of the SR-71, have identified this seat as belonging to an SR-71. This identification is supported by part numbers on various components beginning with A prefix (parts used on all variants of the Blackbird family except D-21) and 4A (denotes parts used on SR-71A and SR-71B) and Q (denotes parts used in the cockpit and life support systems for the aircraft). . In addition, some of the parts bear the unique aircraft inspection stamp used by Lockheed ADP and some are dated 1965 / 1966. Examples of the part numbers found on this seat can be seen in photos accompanying this lot, as follows: Photo 175-7: Part number 4AQ345 RING MOUNT INSTALLATION - MANUAL CUTTER plate found behind Manual Spur release handle on right side of head rest Photo175_8: Part numbers AQ149-11B Support, Headrest, Ejection Seat with Lockheed ADP Inspection Stamp, AQ338 EXTENSION TUBE, "D" RING, EJECTOR SEAT, AQ301-3 A "D" Ring Bracket Cover Assembly Serial Number and AQ149-8 Support, Headrest, Ejection Seat with Lockheed ADP Inspection Stamp Photo 175_9: parts stamped with Lockheed Skunkworks inspection stamps denoting “Functional Test” and dated 1965 and 1966 respectively. This seat is in overall very good condition and does not bear evidence of having been ejected. This is an incredibly rare aviation artifact in museum quality condition.

  

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/500 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:48 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/640 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:31 EST PM

+++ 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.

 

CANOGA PARK- The Los Angeles Fire Department battled a Major Emergency Structure Fire in the west San Fernando Valley on Monday, October 18, 2021.

 

The fire at 8423 Canoga Avenue in Canoga Park, was first noted at 12:18 PM by an LAFD Paramedic Ambulance crew returning from a nearby emergency. Within moments of their reporting the fire, flames were through the roof of the 125' x 125' one-story industrial building that also housed an adjoining but unrelated business at 8425 Canoga Avenue.

 

As that first-arriving LAFD Paramedic crew circled the structure to gain situational awareness and guide fellow responders, they encountered the first of three adult male civilians with severe burn injuries outside the burning building. Two proved to be in critical condition and the other in serious condition. All three were taken to area hospitals. Sadly, one of the critically injured men died later while undergoing hospital care.

 

The rapid spread of intense flames and multiple explosions heard within the building guided first-arriving firefighters to quickly commence defensive operations, applying multiple large diameter hose streams from the exterior, including two from atop extended aerial ladders, to prevent flames from extending beyond the well involved structure.

 

With the exception of a forty square-foot section of the roof at 8427 Canoga Avenue destroyed by surface fire, the tactics proved successful in holding the blaze to the pair of unrelated businesses under one roof at 8423 and 8425 Canoga Avenue.

 

It took 150 Los Angeles Firefighter just 75 minutes to extinguish the flames.

 

Firefighters remained active through the night extinguishing hotspots and minimizing hazards at the structurally compromised building with the help of LAFD's robotic firefighting vehicle and heavy equipment.

 

At daylight Tuesday, LAFD crews resumed a systematic search within the largely destroyed premises. During their methodical search among tons of burnt debris inside the structure, firefighters discovered the remains of an adult male, bringing the overall patient count to four, with a total of two deceased and two remaining hospitalized.

 

No other injuries were reported.

 

Scientific testing of materials inside the building of fire origin yielded positive results for hemp, and it appears that the operation inside involved the extraction from hemp, not dissimilar to that used in the Butane Honey Oil extraction process.

 

Though the business was a legal enterprise, the operation inside appeared to be illegal, as it did not adhere to established permitting processes and safety requirements.

 

Pursuant to protocol, the fire's cause remains the focus of a joint active investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Crime Task Force (L.A. Impact).

 

A positive identification of the dead men, as well as the cause, time and manner of their death will be determined by the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner.

 

© Photo by Mike Meadows

 

LAFD Incident 101821-0791

 

Connect with us: LAFD.ORG | News | Facebook | Instagram | Reddit | Twitter: @LAFD @LAFDtalk

Catacombs, Montparnasse, Paris

 

I decided that today was a day for going underground, and I set off to Montparnasse to visit the catacombs. These are a vast maze of tunnels under Paris originally used for quarrying the stone out of which the city's main buildings are constructed. In the late 18th Century, the state of the city's churchyards had become so disgusting that the city removed the bones from all of them. They were brought here at night, the carts coming from the centre of the city accompanied by torch-bearing acolytes and priests chanting the requiem Mass. A skull count showed that almost six million corpses were removed in this way. They were buried deep underground, but these people being Parisians the skulls and bones were arranged in a neat and methodical way, a meaningful chaos. Layers of tibia and femurs are crowned by a layer of pelvises and skulls, and so on. Each churchyard was grouped together, and a plaque shows which parish provided the skeletons.

 

The work was interrupted by the French Revolution,which provided plenty more corpses for when the work was resumed. Altogether about a kilometre and a half of tunnels were filled with the remains of dead Parisians, and you can walk through them on a winding route under the streets around Montparnasse station. In fact, this is just a tiny fraction of the tunnels. The catacombs extend for hundreds of kilometres under the city, many of them rarely explored and difficult of access. Because of this, they are regularly broken into by intrepid adventurers, and many legends have grown up about parts of the network. However, my favourite story is one which is true.

 

In 2004, a group of police cadets on a training exercise were given the task of tracking an imaginary criminal in a part of the network which was little known. They got into the system through a manhole, and when they were about a hundred feet underground something rather odd happened. They triggered a motion sensor which set off the sound of barking dogs. Thinking that it was part of the exercise, they headed onwards only to come out into a vast cavern which had been fully equipped as a cinema. An anteroom had been equipped and fully stocked as a bar, and there was also a film storage room. When the cadets reported what they had seen, the electricity board were sent in to work out where the invaders were getting their electricity from. Instead, they found the wires all cut, the equipment removed, and a sign saying 'Don't try to follow us. You'll never find us.'

 

Perhaps the cineastes had got fed up with waiting to get into the system officially, because this was the only place all week that I encountered a serious queue. Worse, I was just in front of a small group of people who talked constantly in very loud voices. She was an American who obviously lived in Paris, and they appeared to be young relatives who'd come to stay. She was taking them down the catacombs, and the price to be paid for this by the poor kids was to suffer her pretentious nonsense. She went on about spirituality, and homeopathy, and psychoanalysis, and the inner energy, and so on. Fair play to the kids, they responded enthusiastically enough.

 

And then she got out some of her stream of consciousness poetry, and started reading it in a loud voice. Well, goodness me. I was put in mind of something the graphic artist Alan Moore said when he was in Hollywood helping turn his 'V for Vendetta' into a film, and he was asked at a director's lunch why he lived in Northampton, England. "Because it keeps me grounded", he replied, and I thought that this was exactly right. It was like the opposite of this pompous woman, although to be fair to her I expect that if I went to live in Paris I would also disappear up my own backside.

 

The catacombs are brilliant, worth every minute of the queuing time, worth every insufferable stream of consciousness adjective. And then I went and did some shopping.

 

You can read my account of my travels at pariswander.blogspot.co.uk.

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/400 and Focal Length of 45.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:48 EST PM

+++ 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.

 

‎WESTLAKE - It took nearly 150 ‪Los Angeles‬ ‪Firefighters‬ nearly two and a half hours to extinguish a major emergency fire in a vacant 2 story office building west of downtown Los Angeles Monday evening.

 

The Los Angeles Fire Department was summoned at 7:01 PM on June 13, 2016 to a structure fire at 2411 West 8th Street in the Westlake neighborhood not far from MacArthur Park. LAFD responders arrived quickly to find intense fire on the upper floor of a long vacant 14,351 square-foot two story office building, the site of previous blazes.

 

Firefighters used ground ladders to assist several imperiled persons at windows of the burning structure, with LAFD responders entering the building to performing the rescue of three others.

 

While extending hoselines to aggressively battle the flames within, LAFD crews sadly discovered and retrieved a dead man from the inferno, before the failing structure forced then to switch to defensive exterior operations twenty minutes into the firefight.

 

A total of 147 LAFD personnel under the command of Battalion Chief Jaime Moore, confined the blaze to the heavily damaged building of fire origin - which had no functional fire sprinklers, extinguishing the bulk of flame in just 2 hours and 22 minutes.

 

As a result of witnesses statements, Los Angeles Police Department Officers later detained and arrested an adult male suspected of starting the fire. He and one of the persons earlier rescued by firefighters, were taken to an area hospital by ambulance for evaluation of non-life threatening injuries.

 

With the flames extinguished well past darkness, firefighters remained at the structurally unsound premises to douse hotspots, prevent public harm and prepare for a further search at daybreak.

 

Early Tuesday, investigation teams from the LAFD Arson/Counter-Terrorism Section methodically processed the large and still-smoldering site to determine the fire's cause and origin, as highly-trained Human Remains Detection Dog and Handler teams performed a relentless search of the collapsed structure for deceased victims.

 

With the canines' help, firefighters discovered the remains of four adult victims, two men and two women, amid the rubble on the second floor of the building. Their discovery, combined with the male victim found deceased by firefighters battling the blaze, brought the death tally to five, all of whom appeared to be transients.

 

No firefighters sustained injury in the firefight, investigation or recovery operations.

 

A positive identification of the dead persons, to include the cause, time and manner of their death will be determined by the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner.

 

Photo Use Permitted via Creative Commons - Credit: LAFD Photo | Christopher Wan

 

LAFD Incident: 061316-1267

 

Connect with us: LAFD.ORG | News | Facebook | Instagram | Reddit | Twitter: @LAFD @LAFDtalk

Folklore Museum

Object ID: 32947 Abbey Lane 16

Hauerhaus from the 16th/17th Century with ethnological collection

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_denkmalgesch%C3%BCtzten_O...

 

(further information you can get by clicking on the link at the end of page!)

History

 

Plaque to the founder of the Hyrtl'schen orphanage Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel

© IMAREAL / E. Vavra

The Biedermeier-influenced city on the edge of the Vienna Woods is the capital of the district Mödling in the south of Vienna. The town has experienced in its 1100-year history since the first mention very different phases: in the Middle Ages briefly Babenberg residence, for centuries an economically potent wine market, from the 19th Century summer resort and industrial center, since 1875 town, in the 20th Century for almost two decades XXIVth district of Vienna, since 1954 again an independent municipality of Lower Austria and as a school and garden city popular residential area in the vicinity of Vienna.

Mödling has partnerships with cities in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy.

The historical tradition of Mödling goes back far beyond the first written mention, how settlement finds from the Neolithic Age, Hallstatt period (eg calendar mountain) and Roman times as well as the great Avar burial ground "at the Golden Staircase" from the 7/8th Century BCE prove. In the year 903 Mödling is first mentioned (Medilihha). The later settlement was probably made in the 11th Century beneath an early castle building on the church mountain (Kirchenberg), where later a Romanesque predecessor of Othmar church was built.

In the late 12th century Mödling was for a few decades the residence of a Babenberg branch line. Henry the Elder, a brother of Duke Leopold V., had since the 1170 century belongings in and around Mödling. He and his son Henry the Younger, calling himself "Duke of Mödling", resided on the castle probably built around 1150 in the Klausen, among whose most famous visitors was Walther von der Vogelweide. With the death of Henry the Younger in 1236 extinguished the Mödlinger line of the Babenberg and the reign became princely domain. The time of the Babenberg commemorates the in late 12th Century built Romanesque ossuary at Othmar church - a circular building with an apse - as well as the denomination "Babenberg".

In the late Middle Ages, Medlich developed into a major wine market (1343 mention of market town) which in the 15th Century as one of the four princely spell markets was also represented in the Parliament - in addition to Gumpoldskirchen, Langenlois and Perchtoldsdorf. For centuries shaped the wine-growing the economy and social structure. The Mödlinger wine was good and helped the market particularly in the 15th and 16th Century to its prosperity. The settlement reached at the end of the Middle Ages that extent, which until the 19th Century should remain essentially unchanged. The center formed ​​the area around the Schrannenplatz with a dense stand of late medieval and early modern town houses that bear evidence of the wealth and self-confidence of the citizens of the market town. From the late medieval Schrannen building, the official residence of the market judge, was created in 1548 the representative Renaissance town hall with loggia.

The elevated lying Othmar church became in the 15th Century by transferring the rights of the church of St. Martin parish church of Mödling. The massive late Gothic church was built in a nearly 70-year construction period from 1454 to 1523 on the walls of six predecessors and able to resist fortified. As Mödling was destroyed in 1529 by the Ottomans, the just completed church lost its roof and remained for over a century till the restoration in 1660/70 a ruin. On the Merian engraving from 1649 the uncovered Othmar church on the left side is clearly visible. As a temporary parish church served the about 1450 built late-Gothic hospital church.

The internal conditions at this time were mainly marked of the clashes of the market with the princely rule Burg Mödling - since 1558 combined with the rule of Liechtenstein - which reached its climax in 1600 under the energetic administrator Georg Wiesing (1593-1611). During the Reformation, the market largely became Protestant. In the course of recatholicization a Capuchin monastery was founded in 1631, which served as a factory after the repeal under Joseph II and was then bought by the Thonet family (so-called Thonet Schlössel, today Bezirksmuseum).

In Türkenjahr 1683 (besiegement of the Turks) took place in the Othmar church a horrific bloodbath, in which hundreds of people who had sought refuge there were killed. The church was destroyed again, but this time built up rapidly with the market judge Wolfgang Ignaz Viechtl in a few years.

End of the 18th Century occurred in Mödling the settlement of industrial enterprises, especially textile mills that took advantage of the cheaper production possibilities and also its proximity to Vienna. Was decisively shaped the character of the place but by the rise to a summer resort, initiated by Prince Johann I of Liechtenstein beginning of the 19th Century, which acquired in 1807 the rule of Liechtenstein-Mödling with the former family ancestral home. He had the area under enormous cost reforested (Schirmföhren/pinus mugo, acacia, etc.) and transformed to a public park in Romantic style with promenade paths, steep paths and artificial constructions (Black tower, amphitheater, Husarentempel). The ruined castles Mödling and Liechtenstein were restored. The former Liechtenstein'sche landscape park is considered a remarkable example of the garden culture in 1800 and is now a popular tourist destination (1974 Natural Preserve Föhrenberge).

Since the Biedermeier Mödling in the summer was an extremely popular artist hangout. Among the most famous artists of the 19th Century who were inspired by the romantic nature here, were Franz Schubert, Franz Grillparzer, Ferdinand Waldmüller, Ferdinand Raimund and Ludwig van Beethoven, who here worked on one of his major works, the "Missa Solemnis". In the 20th Century settled inter alia Arnold Schönberg, Anton von Webern, Anton Wildgans, Franz Theodor Csokor and Albert Drach temporarily or permanently down. To Beethoven, Schönberg and Wildgans memorials have been established (Beethoven House, Schönberg House, Wildgans archive).

In the second half of the 19th Century Mödling became administrative center (District Court, District administration) and an industrial site and educational location with high schools and colleges (eg educational establishment Francisco-Josephinum). The good traffic situation at the southern railway, the progressive industrialization and the expansion of health facilities (park, Kursalon) led to a rapid expansion of the hitherto for centuries unchanged market. Under mayor Joseph Schöffel (1873-1882), who became famous because of his successful engagement against the deforestation of the Vienna Woods as the "savior of the Vienna Woods", followed the methodical installation of the so-called Schoeffel(before) city - Schöffelvorstadt (New Mödling) east of the Southern Railway and the establishment of workers' settlements. Later followed the exclusive residential areas of the turn of the century with their representative residential buildings. Probably the most important building of the late 19th Century is the Hyrtl'sche orphanage (1886-1889), founded by the Viennese anatomist, Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel. The Orphanage church St. Joseph was built on the in 1787 demolished Martin Church.

On 18th November 1875 the emerging market town was raised to the status of a city, two years later the incorporation of Klausen and Vorderbrühl took place. Through the establishment of Great-Vienna under the Nazi regime on 15th October 1938 the young city for 16 years lost its municipal autonomy; 1954 it became again a part of Lower Austria.

Symbol for the characteristic environment of Mödling was the "width pine" on the Anninger whose age goes back to the 16th Century (around 1550). It was a well-known natural landmark and has become the symbol of the city. 1988 died the tree and it had to be removed in 1997 for safety reasons. The remains are now in the Lower Austrian Provincial Museum.

geschichte.landesmuseum.net/index.asp?contenturl=http://g...

This was my first game drive at Mavela Game Lodge...the one were it rained and we got a flat tire. Since this reserve is private guides are free to leave the road to get closer to the animals. This photo was taken with a short telephoto focal length. We were able to watch this elephant eat the tree he had pushed over; they have a very methodical way of doing it.

Catacombs, Montparnasse, Paris

 

I decided that today was a day for going underground, and I set off to Montparnasse to visit the catacombs. These are a vast maze of tunnels under Paris originally used for quarrying the stone out of which the city's main buildings are constructed. In the late 18th Century, the state of the city's churchyards had become so disgusting that the city removed the bones from all of them. They were brought here at night, the carts coming from the centre of the city accompanied by torch-bearing acolytes and priests chanting the requiem Mass. A skull count showed that almost six million corpses were removed in this way. They were buried deep underground, but these people being Parisians the skulls and bones were arranged in a neat and methodical way, a meaningful chaos. Layers of tibia and femurs are crowned by a layer of pelvises and skulls, and so on. Each churchyard was grouped together, and a plaque shows which parish provided the skeletons.

 

The work was interrupted by the French Revolution,which provided plenty more corpses for when the work was resumed. Altogether about a kilometre and a half of tunnels were filled with the remains of dead Parisians, and you can walk through them on a winding route under the streets around Montparnasse station. In fact, this is just a tiny fraction of the tunnels. The catacombs extend for hundreds of kilometres under the city, many of them rarely explored and difficult of access. Because of this, they are regularly broken into by intrepid adventurers, and many legends have grown up about parts of the network. However, my favourite story is one which is true.

 

In 2004, a group of police cadets on a training exercise were given the task of tracking an imaginary criminal in a part of the network which was little known. They got into the system through a manhole, and when they were about a hundred feet underground something rather odd happened. They triggered a motion sensor which set off the sound of barking dogs. Thinking that it was part of the exercise, they headed onwards only to come out into a vast cavern which had been fully equipped as a cinema. An anteroom had been equipped and fully stocked as a bar, and there was also a film storage room. When the cadets reported what they had seen, the electricity board were sent in to work out where the invaders were getting their electricity from. Instead, they found the wires all cut, the equipment removed, and a sign saying 'Don't try to follow us. You'll never find us.'

 

Perhaps the cineastes had got fed up with waiting to get into the system officially, because this was the only place all week that I encountered a serious queue. Worse, I was just in front of a small group of people who talked constantly in very loud voices. She was an American who obviously lived in Paris, and they appeared to be young relatives who'd come to stay. She was taking them down the catacombs, and the price to be paid for this by the poor kids was to suffer her pretentious nonsense. She went on about spirituality, and homeopathy, and psychoanalysis, and the inner energy, and so on. Fair play to the kids, they responded enthusiastically enough.

 

And then she got out some of her stream of consciousness poetry, and started reading it in a loud voice. Well, goodness me. I was put in mind of something the graphic artist Alan Moore said when he was in Hollywood helping turn his 'V for Vendetta' into a film, and he was asked at a director's lunch why he lived in Northampton, England. "Because it keeps me grounded", he replied, and I thought that this was exactly right. It was like the opposite of this pompous woman, although to be fair to her I expect that if I went to live in Paris I would also disappear up my own backside.

 

The catacombs are brilliant, worth every minute of the queuing time, worth every insufferable stream of consciousness adjective. And then I went and did some shopping.

 

You can read my account of my travels at pariswander.blogspot.co.uk.

www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project

Phaselis Research

 

Phaselis

 

When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.

 

This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.

 

Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.

 

By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.

 

Phaselis Territorium

 

The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.

 

Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.

 

PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.

 

Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaselis

 

Co. G, 13th PA. Infantry, Co. E, 76th PA. Infantry during the Civil war and Co. G, 20th KS. Infantry during the Spanish American War.

CAPT. DAVID STEWART ELLIOTT. For more than half a century the name Elliott has been one of important associations with Kansas history. The quality of public service has distinguished the family in all generations. The first of the name in Kansas was a Pennsylvania soldier, also named David Stewart Elliott, who was killed by Quantrell's band of raiders during the Civil war. The late Capt. David Stewart Elliott of Coffeyville, long known as a lawyer, editor, fraternal organizer, and soldier, also gave up his life as a sacrifice to the country during the Philippine war. Several of the children of the late Captain Elliott are filling worthy places in their respective spheres, including his daughter, Miss Leila C. Elliott, who is now city treasurer of Coffeyville.

David Stewart Elliott, father of the late Captain Elliott, was born at Lewistown, Pennsylvania, was reared and educated and married in that state, and was an editor by profession. He served as a soldier in the Mexican war; and though quite an old man at the time he enlisted in 1861 in a Pennsylvania regiment of infantry. He was in the service in Kansas, and his company was on its way to Fort Smith to assist in repelling the Price invasion of Missouri and Kansas when he was killed by Quantrell's men at Baxter Springs. This was in 1864. He and others of the command were captured by the Quantrell raiders, were lined up against the wall and all shot. This Pennsylvania soldier whose record deserves special mention in any history of Kansas had only one child, the late Capt. David Stewart Elliott. The mother of Captain Elliott was born at Everett, Pennsylvania, in 1822 and died at Coffeyville in 1892.

At Everett, Pennsylvania, Capt. David Stewart Elliott was born December 23, 1843. When about fifteen years of age he entered a newspaper office to learn the printing trade and in April, 1861, enlisted in Company G of the Thirteenth Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry. That was a three months' regiment, and at the end of his term he re-enlisted in Company E of the Seventy-sixth Pennsylvania Volunteers, and was with that command for more than three years. In 1868 he became editor of the Bedford County Press at Everett, Pennsylvania, and continued in that capacity until 1873. On February 9, 1869, he was admitted to the bar of Bedford County, but after practicing a few years resumed his work as editor and was editor of the Everett Press from 1881 to 1885.

In May, 1885, Captain Elliott became a member of the Montgomery County Bar, locating at Coffeyville, but soon answered the call to his old profession as a newspaper man and from June 5, 1885, to September 1, 1897, edited the Coffeyville Weekly Journal. Early in 1892 he established the Daily Journal, and was also its editor until 1897.

In May, 1898, the Twentieth Kansas Regiment was enlisted for the Spanish-American war, and Company G was recruited at Independence, consisting for the most part of Montgomery County boys. The officers of the company were: D. Stewart Elliott, captain; H. A. Scott of Sycamore, first lieutenant; and William A. McTaggart, son of Senator McTaggart, second lieutenant.

As every Kansan knows, the Twentieth Kansas made its record of achievement in the Philippines. Captain Elliott, whose qualifications as a military leader were enhanced by his previous service in the Civil war, went with the regiment to the Philippines early in 1899, and while in line of duty at Calocan, just north of Manila, on February 28, 1899, was shot by a Filipino sharpshooter and died a few hours later. His remains were brought home and on April 14, 1899, were laid to rest at Coffeyville with military honors. He had entered the Civil war at the age of seventeen, and he was in his fifty-sixth year when death came to him in the Far East.

Something of Captain Elliott's talents and characteristics can be learned by a brief quotation from an old history of Montgomery County: "After locating in the county Captain Elliott devoted only a portion of his time to the practice of law. His tastes led to the formation of his fellow men into associations, political parties and other organizations, and the promulgation and advocacy of their principles, rather than to the irksome and methodical work demanded in the practice of law. For this work of his choice he was by nature admirably equipped. He was a fluent and pleasant speaker and at once took a leading part in meetings to effect such organizations, or to advocate their tenets. As a writer he was terse, graceful and effective, and as a soldier enthusiastic and courageous. During his residence in Coffeyville Captain Elliott was its attorney for one or more terms and a member one term of the lower house of the Kansas Legislature, where he was at once a conspicuous member. At his death he was a member of sixteen lodges."

Captain Elliott was a republican, and was filling the office of city clerk at Coffeyville at the time he resigned to enlist for service in the Spanish-American war. As an active member of the Methodist Episcopal Church he served as president of the Epworth League and superintendent of the Sunday school, and held all the lay offices in the church. Among the fraternities of which he was an influential member were the following: Keystone Lodge No. 102, Ancient Free and Accepted Masons; Coffeyville Chapter No. 89, Royal Arch Masons; St. Bernard's Commandery No. 10, Knight Templars, at Independence; with the Scottish Rite bodies of Masonry; Coffeyville Lodge of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows; Camp No. 665, Modern Woodmen of America; Woodmen of the World; Select Friends; Knights and Ladies of Security; Knights of Pythias; Lodge No. 279, Ancient Order of United Workmen; Post No. 90, Grand Army of the Republic; also the organization of Sons of Veterans.

Captain Elliott married Miss Clara Barndollar, who is still living at Coffeyville with her children. She was born at Everett, Bedford County, Pennsylvania, September 24, 1846, and represents an old American family. One of her ancestors was John Williams, who served as a private under Capt. David Hendershot in the First Battalion of Bedford County during the Revolutionary war. Another of her revolutionary ancestors was Capt. Richard Dunlap, who was captain of the Bedford Company in the First Battalion of Militia commanded by Col. William Parker, Captain Dunlap was killed while fighting at Frankstown, Pennsylvania, on June 3, 1781. Another ancestral connection of interest was Capt. James Martin. He married Sarah Thomas, the great-grandmother of Mrs. Captain Elliott, and they were married at the home of Benjamin Franklin on October 19, 1759. Captain Martin was a first lieutenant and afterwards promoted to captain of a company from Pennsylvania in the Revolution.

A brief record of the children of the late Capt. David S. Elliott and wife is as follows: John B., who was a member of his father's company and who is now superintendent of the Pullman Company at Kansas City, Missouri; Miss Leila C.; Irene, who lives at Coffeyville with her mother; James Russell, who enlisted in his father's company at the age of fifteen, and was the youngest soldier in the American army during the Spanish-American war; Grace, at home with her mother; and David S., Jr., who was educated at Baker University and is the republican nominee for county clerk of Montgomery County.

Miss Leila C. Elliott, now city treasurer of Coffeyville, was born at Everett, Pennsylvania, but was reared and educated at Coffeyville. She possesses unusual business ability and efficiency in the routine and detail management of public offices, and for a time was deputy city clerk and afterwards was elected and served as city clerk for three years. In 1913 she became city treasurer, and is giving a most excellent administration of that important office. Miss Elliott is a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and is active in the Methodist Episcopal Church.

+++ 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.

 

+++ 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.

 

“DEVELOPMENTAL NEPHROLOGY: FROM EMBRYOLOGY TO METABOLOMICS”

Systems Medicine series

Hygeia Press

1st edition: October 2011

Also available as ebook (pdf)

 

The traditional approach to kidney disorders is changing. In the field of diagnostics much innovative research is ongoing: from the “old” embryology, revisited and re-interpreted with new eyes in the light of immunohistochemistry, up to metabolomics the latest “daughter” of genomics, the most promising and remarkable of the “omics” disciplines.

 

Between these two extremes we find a universe of novelties, ranging from the most recent urinary biomarkers to the questions of nutrition and growth, as well as those of ethics, which the new populations of extremely low birth weight (ELBW) neonates present to neonatologists and nephrologists.

 

The studies on perinatal programming expand the temporal horizon of precocious reduction in the number of nephrons, both congenital and/or acquired, thus dilating and multiplying the immediate and long-term negative effects. Neonatal asphyxia, obstructive uropathies, nephrotoxic drugs administered to the mother and/or to the neonate, malnutrition, underfeeding, or overfeeding make it necessary to apply all possible preventive measures to ensure the well-being of the kidney. Because of the kidney’s holistic dimension, the methodical and rigorous study of neonatal nephrology has advanced all aspects of health through the life cycle.

 

This volume is an update state of the art of the latest discoveries in neonatal and pediatric nephrology. These advances will have an even greater impact when the same children reach adulthood, and the ultimate consequences of perinatal care are unmasked.

 

EDITORS

Vassilios Fanos

Robert L. Chevalier

Gavino Faa

Luigi Cataldi

 

AUTHORS

Rino Agostiniani

Karel Allegaert

Fani Anatolitou

Roberto Antonucci

Jacob V. Aranda

Alessandra Atzei

Luigi Atzori

Luigi Barberini

Kay D. Beharry

Martina Bertin

Luigi Cataldi

Robert L. Chevalier

Nataliya Chorny

Erich Cosmi

Laura Cuzzolin

Ernesto D’Aloja

Mario De Curtis

Angelica Dessì

Gavino Faa

Daniela Fanni

Vassilios Fanos

Gabriele Finco

Helen Georgaki-Angelaki

Clara Gerosa

Hercília Guimarães

Nicoletta Iacovidou

Maria Antonietta Marcialis

Viviana Marinelli

Silvio Maringhini

Alice Melis

Guido Monga

Michele Mussap

Sonia Nemolato

Antonio Noto

Giovanni Ottonello

Maria Dolores Pilloni

Bernadette Pinna

Maria Cristina Pintus

Melania Puddu

Elisabetta Puxeddu

Jacques Rigo

Luigi Ruggeri

Kosmas Sarafidis

Morris Shoeneman

Teresa Tomé

Daniele Trevisanuto

Maria Elisabetta Trudu

Gloria B. Valencia

John N. van den Anker

Silvia Visentin

Murat Yurdakök

Marco Zaffanello

Vincenzo Zanardo

 

Cover picture: the proximal extreme of each “S-shaped body” develops into the proximal and the distal tube which fuses with the ureteric bud tip, undergoes cavitation and then transforms into a collecting duct (Prof. Gavino Faa, with permission).

 

For more information: www.hygeiapress.com/individualizedmedicine/?p=127

 

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/500 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:07 EST PM

Litschauerhof, St. Joseph Children's Home

Object ID: 118040 Eisentorgasse 1

In the core from the 16th/17th Century stemming four-sided building with tower facing the court, heavily remodeled in 1965.

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_denkmalgesch%C3%BCtzten_O...

 

(further information you can get by clicking on the link at the end of page!)

History

 

Plaque to the founder of the Hyrtl'schen orphanage Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel

© IMAREAL / E. Vavra

The Biedermeier-influenced city on the edge of the Vienna Woods is the capital of the district Mödling in the south of Vienna. The town has experienced in its 1100-year history since the first mention very different phases: in the Middle Ages briefly Babenberg residence, for centuries an economically potent wine market, from the 19th Century summer resort and industrial center, since 1875 town, in the 20th Century for almost two decades XXIVth district of Vienna, since 1954 again an independent municipality of Lower Austria and as a school and garden city popular residential area in the vicinity of Vienna.

Mödling has partnerships with cities in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy.

The historical tradition of Mödling goes back far beyond the first written mention, how settlement finds from the Neolithic Age, Hallstatt period (eg calendar mountain) and Roman times as well as the great Avar burial ground "at the Golden Staircase" from the 7/8th Century BCE prove. In the year 903 Mödling is first mentioned (Medilihha). The later settlement was probably made in the 11th Century beneath an early castle building on the church mountain (Kirchenberg), where later a Romanesque predecessor of Othmar church was built.

In the late 12th century Mödling was for a few decades the residence of a Babenberg branch line. Henry the Elder, a brother of Duke Leopold V., had since the 1170 century belongings in and around Mödling. He and his son Henry the Younger, calling himself "Duke of Mödling", resided on the castle probably built around 1150 in the Klausen, among whose most famous visitors was Walther von der Vogelweide. With the death of Henry the Younger in 1236 extinguished the Mödlinger line of the Babenberg and the reign became princely domain. The time of the Babenberg commemorates the in late 12th Century built Romanesque ossuary at Othmar church - a circular building with an apse - as well as the denomination "Babenberg".

In the late Middle Ages, Medlich developed into a major wine market (1343 mention of market town) which in the 15th Century as one of the four princely spell markets was also represented in the Parliament - in addition to Gumpoldskirchen, Langenlois and Perchtoldsdorf. For centuries shaped the wine-growing the economy and social structure. The Mödlinger wine was good and helped the market particularly in the 15th and 16th Century to its prosperity. The settlement reached at the end of the Middle Ages that extent, which until the 19th Century should remain essentially unchanged. The center formed ​​the area around the Schrannenplatz with a dense stand of late medieval and early modern town houses that bear evidence of the wealth and self-confidence of the citizens of the market town. From the late medieval Schrannen building, the official residence of the market judge, was created in 1548 the representative Renaissance town hall with loggia.

The elevated lying Othmar church became in the 15th Century by transferring the rights of the church of St. Martin parish church of Mödling. The massive late Gothic church was built in a nearly 70-year construction period from 1454 to 1523 on the walls of six predecessors and able to resist fortified. As Mödling was destroyed in 1529 by the Ottomans, the just completed church lost its roof and remained for over a century till the restoration in 1660/70 a ruin. On the Merian engraving from 1649 the uncovered Othmar church on the left side is clearly visible. As a temporary parish church served the about 1450 built late-Gothic hospital church.

The internal conditions at this time were mainly marked of the clashes of the market with the princely rule Burg Mödling - since 1558 combined with the rule of Liechtenstein - which reached its climax in 1600 under the energetic administrator Georg Wiesing (1593-1611). During the Reformation, the market largely became Protestant. In the course of recatholicization a Capuchin monastery was founded in 1631, which served as a factory after the repeal under Joseph II and was then bought by the Thonet family (so-called Thonet Schlössel, today Bezirksmuseum).

In Türkenjahr 1683 (besiegement of the Turks) took place in the Othmar church a horrific bloodbath, in which hundreds of people who had sought refuge there were killed. The church was destroyed again, but this time built up rapidly with the market judge Wolfgang Ignaz Viechtl in a few years.

End of the 18th Century occurred in Mödling the settlement of industrial enterprises, especially textile mills that took advantage of the cheaper production possibilities and also its proximity to Vienna. Was decisively shaped the character of the place but by the rise to a summer resort, initiated by Prince Johann I of Liechtenstein beginning of the 19th Century, which acquired in 1807 the rule of Liechtenstein-Mödling with the former family ancestral home. He had the area under enormous cost reforested (Schirmföhren/pinus mugo, acacia, etc.) and transformed to a public park in Romantic style with promenade paths, steep paths and artificial constructions (Black tower, amphitheater, Husarentempel). The ruined castles Mödling and Liechtenstein were restored. The former Liechtenstein'sche landscape park is considered a remarkable example of the garden culture in 1800 and is now a popular tourist destination (1974 Natural Preserve Föhrenberge).

Since the Biedermeier Mödling in the summer was an extremely popular artist hangout. Among the most famous artists of the 19th Century who were inspired by the romantic nature here, were Franz Schubert, Franz Grillparzer, Ferdinand Waldmüller, Ferdinand Raimund and Ludwig van Beethoven, who here worked on one of his major works, the "Missa Solemnis". In the 20th Century settled inter alia Arnold Schönberg, Anton von Webern, Anton Wildgans, Franz Theodor Csokor and Albert Drach temporarily or permanently down. To Beethoven, Schönberg and Wildgans memorials have been established (Beethoven House, Schönberg House, Wildgans archive).

In the second half of the 19th Century Mödling became administrative center (District Court, District administration) and an industrial site and educational location with high schools and colleges (eg educational establishment Francisco-Josephinum). The good traffic situation at the southern railway, the progressive industrialization and the expansion of health facilities (park, Kursalon) led to a rapid expansion of the hitherto for centuries unchanged market. Under mayor Joseph Schöffel (1873-1882), who became famous because of his successful engagement against the deforestation of the Vienna Woods as the "savior of the Vienna Woods", followed the methodical installation of the so-called Schoeffel(before) city - Schöffelvorstadt (New Mödling) east of the Southern Railway and the establishment of workers' settlements. Later followed the exclusive residential areas of the turn of the century with their representative residential buildings. Probably the most important building of the late 19th Century is the Hyrtl'sche orphanage (1886-1889), founded by the Viennese anatomist, Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel. The Orphanage church St. Joseph was built on the in 1787 demolished Martin Church.

On 18th November 1875 the emerging market town was raised to the status of a city, two years later the incorporation of Klausen and Vorderbrühl took place. Through the establishment of Great-Vienna under the Nazi regime on 15th October 1938 the young city for 16 years lost its municipal autonomy; 1954 it became again a part of Lower Austria.

Symbol for the characteristic environment of Mödling was the "width pine" on the Anninger whose age goes back to the 16th Century (around 1550). It was a well-known natural landmark and has become the symbol of the city. 1988 died the tree and it had to be removed in 1997 for safety reasons. The remains are now in the Lower Austrian Provincial Museum.

geschichte.landesmuseum.net/index.asp?contenturl=http://g...

In the foreground, Johann Nepomuk-Statue, statua del Giovanni Nepomuceno, estatua de Juan Nepomuceno (santo), statue de Jean Népomucène, statue of John of Nepomuk, Jan Nepomucen (duchowny)

 

Litschauerhof, St. Joseph Children's Home

Object ID: 118040 Eisentorgasse 1

In the core from the 16th/17th Century stemming four-sided building with tower facing the court, heavily remodeled in 1965.

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_denkmalgesch%C3%BCtzten_O...

 

(further information you can get by clicking on the link at the end of page!)

History

 

Plaque to the founder of the Hyrtl'schen orphanage Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel

© IMAREAL / E. Vavra

The Biedermeier-influenced city on the edge of the Vienna Woods is the capital of the district Mödling in the south of Vienna. The town has experienced in its 1100-year history since the first mention very different phases: in the Middle Ages briefly Babenberg residence, for centuries an economically potent wine market, from the 19th Century summer resort and industrial center, since 1875 town, in the 20th Century for almost two decades XXIVth district of Vienna, since 1954 again an independent municipality of Lower Austria and as a school and garden city popular residential area in the vicinity of Vienna.

Mödling has partnerships with cities in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy.

The historical tradition of Mödling goes back far beyond the first written mention, how settlement finds from the Neolithic Age, Hallstatt period (eg calendar mountain) and Roman times as well as the great Avar burial ground "at the Golden Staircase" from the 7/8th Century BCE prove. In the year 903 Mödling is first mentioned (Medilihha). The later settlement was probably made in the 11th Century beneath an early castle building on the church mountain (Kirchenberg), where later a Romanesque predecessor of Othmar church was built.

In the late 12th century Mödling was for a few decades the residence of a Babenberg branch line. Henry the Elder, a brother of Duke Leopold V., had since the 1170 century belongings in and around Mödling. He and his son Henry the Younger, calling himself "Duke of Mödling", resided on the castle probably built around 1150 in the Klausen, among whose most famous visitors was Walther von der Vogelweide. With the death of Henry the Younger in 1236 extinguished the Mödlinger line of the Babenberg and the reign became princely domain. The time of the Babenberg commemorates the in late 12th Century built Romanesque ossuary at Othmar church - a circular building with an apse - as well as the denomination "Babenberg".

In the late Middle Ages, Medlich developed into a major wine market (1343 mention of market town) which in the 15th Century as one of the four princely spell markets was also represented in the Parliament - in addition to Gumpoldskirchen, Langenlois and Perchtoldsdorf. For centuries shaped the wine-growing the economy and social structure. The Mödlinger wine was good and helped the market particularly in the 15th and 16th Century to its prosperity. The settlement reached at the end of the Middle Ages that extent, which until the 19th Century should remain essentially unchanged. The center formed ​​the area around the Schrannenplatz with a dense stand of late medieval and early modern town houses that bear evidence of the wealth and self-confidence of the citizens of the market town. From the late medieval Schrannen building, the official residence of the market judge, was created in 1548 the representative Renaissance town hall with loggia.

The elevated lying Othmar church became in the 15th Century by transferring the rights of the church of St. Martin parish church of Mödling. The massive late Gothic church was built in a nearly 70-year construction period from 1454 to 1523 on the walls of six predecessors and able to resist fortified. As Mödling was destroyed in 1529 by the Ottomans, the just completed church lost its roof and remained for over a century till the restoration in 1660/70 a ruin. On the Merian engraving from 1649 the uncovered Othmar church on the left side is clearly visible. As a temporary parish church served the about 1450 built late-Gothic hospital church.

The internal conditions at this time were mainly marked of the clashes of the market with the princely rule Burg Mödling - since 1558 combined with the rule of Liechtenstein - which reached its climax in 1600 under the energetic administrator Georg Wiesing (1593-1611). During the Reformation, the market largely became Protestant. In the course of recatholicization a Capuchin monastery was founded in 1631, which served as a factory after the repeal under Joseph II and was then bought by the Thonet family (so-called Thonet Schlössel, today Bezirksmuseum).

In Türkenjahr 1683 (besiegement of the Turks) took place in the Othmar church a horrific bloodbath, in which hundreds of people who had sought refuge there were killed. The church was destroyed again, but this time built up rapidly with the market judge Wolfgang Ignaz Viechtl in a few years.

End of the 18th Century occurred in Mödling the settlement of industrial enterprises, especially textile mills that took advantage of the cheaper production possibilities and also its proximity to Vienna. Was decisively shaped the character of the place but by the rise to a summer resort, initiated by Prince Johann I of Liechtenstein beginning of the 19th Century, which acquired in 1807 the rule of Liechtenstein-Mödling with the former family ancestral home. He had the area under enormous cost reforested (Schirmföhren/pinus mugo, acacia, etc.) and transformed to a public park in Romantic style with promenade paths, steep paths and artificial constructions (Black tower, amphitheater, Husarentempel). The ruined castles Mödling and Liechtenstein were restored. The former Liechtenstein'sche landscape park is considered a remarkable example of the garden culture in 1800 and is now a popular tourist destination (1974 Natural Preserve Föhrenberge).

Since the Biedermeier Mödling in the summer was an extremely popular artist hangout. Among the most famous artists of the 19th Century who were inspired by the romantic nature here, were Franz Schubert, Franz Grillparzer, Ferdinand Waldmüller, Ferdinand Raimund and Ludwig van Beethoven, who here worked on one of his major works, the "Missa Solemnis". In the 20th Century settled inter alia Arnold Schönberg, Anton von Webern, Anton Wildgans, Franz Theodor Csokor and Albert Drach temporarily or permanently down. To Beethoven, Schönberg and Wildgans memorials have been established (Beethoven House, Schönberg House, Wildgans archive).

In the second half of the 19th Century Mödling became administrative center (District Court, District administration) and an industrial site and educational location with high schools and colleges (eg educational establishment Francisco-Josephinum). The good traffic situation at the southern railway, the progressive industrialization and the expansion of health facilities (park, Kursalon) led to a rapid expansion of the hitherto for centuries unchanged market. Under mayor Joseph Schöffel (1873-1882), who became famous because of his successful engagement against the deforestation of the Vienna Woods as the "savior of the Vienna Woods", followed the methodical installation of the so-called Schoeffel(before) city - Schöffelvorstadt (New Mödling) east of the Southern Railway and the establishment of workers' settlements. Later followed the exclusive residential areas of the turn of the century with their representative residential buildings. Probably the most important building of the late 19th Century is the Hyrtl'sche orphanage (1886-1889), founded by the Viennese anatomist, Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel. The Orphanage church St. Joseph was built on the in 1787 demolished Martin Church.

On 18th November 1875 the emerging market town was raised to the status of a city, two years later the incorporation of Klausen and Vorderbrühl took place. Through the establishment of Great-Vienna under the Nazi regime on 15th October 1938 the young city for 16 years lost its municipal autonomy; 1954 it became again a part of Lower Austria.

Symbol for the characteristic environment of Mödling was the "width pine" on the Anninger whose age goes back to the 16th Century (around 1550). It was a well-known natural landmark and has become the symbol of the city. 1988 died the tree and it had to be removed in 1997 for safety reasons. The remains are now in the Lower Austrian Provincial Museum.

geschichte.landesmuseum.net/index.asp?contenturl=http://g...

+++ 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.

 

And so it begins...the pre-holiday cleaning of the family room--over many weeks--and the slow, methodical unwrapping of the Christmas goodies. This GIANT ceramic tree was created from a 1950's mold; we bought it over twenty years ago from a ceramic shop whose owner was leaving Greenpoint and moving to Florida; the mold had been destroyed....getting this back home was quite a challenge; it sat on my lap the entire way--and it requires a huge box to be put away in---wrapped in layers of old blankets.

 

This approx 150 pound bear climbed up an 80+ foot tree, and climbed out to very thin branches we were SURE couldn't hold his weight.

 

We watched for 30 minutes, fascinated, as he methodically broke off tiny branches and pulled them toward him to eat (nuts? berries? tiny tender young leaves? couldn't tell from where we were)

 

All the while, the branches he stood on waved and swayed, yet his footing was sure, and he had no problems at all staying where he wanted to be.

 

Want to see more shots? Check out my Bears! set www.flickr.com/photos/25171569@N02/sets/72157627506776917...

 

View Awards Count

 

This is a creative commons image, which you may freely use by linking to this page. Please respect the photographer and his work.

 

(3 photos) Raqqa II (1970) and named after a Syrian city of a circular-plan urban design was painted by Frank Stella (born in Malden, Massachusetts, 1936). With its vibrant geometric aspect it dominats the wall in the North Carolina Museum of Art in Raleigh. It's synthetic polymer and graphite on canvas and is quite large, measuring 120 x 300 in. (304.8 x 762.0 cm). ncartmuseum.org/art/detail/raqqa_ii

 

A video (1 minute 19 seconds) on You Tuve provides an explanation and insight into this work. youtu.be/mLZChjAPnIw

  

"To many artists of Frank Stella’s generation, the highly subjective paintings of the abstract expressionists seemed mannered and self-indulgent. Stella’s response was to systematize the abstract picture using geometry and a strict but arbitrary set of procedures. Explaining that his art 'is based on the fact that only what can be seen there is there,' he sought to distill the image to paint and canvas alone. He stripped his paintings of story or statement—even a brushstroke conveyed too much personality. Stella methodically developed images in series, first mapping the designs on paper before transferring them to canvas. Little was left to chance.

 

Raqqa II belongs to Stella’s aptly titled Protractor Series, begun in 1967. Though never completed, the series was to include thirty-one compositions, each to be carried out in three different formats: interlaces, rainbows, and fans. He titled the paintings after ancient, circular-plan cities. (Raqqa in Syria was an important trade center under the Arab caliphs.) Raqqa II does not lie quietly on the wall. It dominates its surroundings. What at first glance appears like a childlike pattern is actually a highly complex exercise in perception. Bright bands of flat color arc and overlap, promising an illusion of receding space. However, their containment within a strict system of seven shaped and framed units confounds that illusion. The monumental scale and aggressive confidence of Raqqa II typify American art during the 1960s." learn.ncartmuseum.org/artwork/raqqa-ii/

 

Much more on thelife and accomplishments of Stella may be found at

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Stella

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

 

VIEW A VERSION WITHOUT FLICKR COMPRESSION ARTIFACTS

 

Lodgepole Pine, Evening Shadows. Yosemite National Park, California. July 22, 2010. © Copyright G Dan Mitchell - all rights reserved.

 

The evening shadow cast by a nearby high ridge approaches a lone lodgepole pine and an old snag near Tioga Pass, Yosemite National Park.

 

One of my favorite kinds of light is that found at the edges of shadows from higher peaks as they move across lower terrain. (A secret: Among other "tricks," I like to find and follow these margins when I shoot in Yosemite Valley, too.) Because this light most often happens during the relatively early and late hours of the day, the color quality of the light tends to be warm and the angle low. As the patterns of light and shadow move across the landscape, individual elements may get picked out the the light and can often be isolated against darker backgrounds, as in this photograph.

 

The Sierra is full of trees pretty much like this one, and such meadows with the isolated small and large trees and scattered boulders are not hard to find. This particular tree is in one of the extensive meadow areas in the general area of Tioga Pass. The photograph was made in the very late afternoon as the tall ridge to the west was blocking the sun.

 

Despite the still and tranquil nature of the scene, this is an example of a sort of shot that reveals the wrongness of the idea that all landscape is done slowly and methodically and with all the time in the world to work. Sometimes that is the case, but when you work the margins of shadows (or many similar dynamic subjects) there may only be brief seconds when the light is where you want it. An observer might find it humorous to watch the photographer run to get into position and then work very quickly.

 

G Dan Mitchell Photography | Flickr | Twitter (follow me) | Facebook ("Like" my page) | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

‎WESTLAKE - It took nearly 150 ‪Los Angeles‬ ‪Firefighters‬ nearly two and a half hours to extinguish a major emergency fire in a vacant 2 story office building west of downtown Los Angeles Monday evening.

 

The Los Angeles Fire Department was summoned at 7:01 PM on June 13, 2016 to a structure fire at 2411 West 8th Street in the Westlake neighborhood not far from MacArthur Park. LAFD responders arrived quickly to find intense fire on the upper floor of a long vacant 14,351 square-foot two story office building, the site of previous blazes.

 

Firefighters used ground ladders to assist several imperiled persons at windows of the burning structure, with LAFD responders entering the building to performing the rescue of three others.

 

While extending hoselines to aggressively battle the flames within, LAFD crews sadly discovered and retrieved a dead man from the inferno, before the failing structure forced then to switch to defensive exterior operations twenty minutes into the firefight.

 

A total of 147 LAFD personnel under the command of Battalion Chief Jaime Moore, confined the blaze to the heavily damaged building of fire origin - which had no functional fire sprinklers, extinguishing the bulk of flame in just 2 hours and 22 minutes.

 

As a result of witnesses statements, Los Angeles Police Department Officers later detained and arrested an adult male suspected of starting the fire. He and one of the persons earlier rescued by firefighters, were taken to an area hospital by ambulance for evaluation of non-life threatening injuries.

 

With the flames extinguished well past darkness, firefighters remained at the structurally unsound premises to douse hotspots, prevent public harm and prepare for a further search at daybreak.

 

Early Tuesday, investigation teams from the LAFD Arson/Counter-Terrorism Section methodically processed the large and still-smoldering site to determine the fire's cause and origin, as highly-trained Human Remains Detection Dog and Handler teams performed a relentless search of the collapsed structure for deceased victims.

 

With the canines' help, firefighters discovered the remains of four adult victims, two men and two women, amid the rubble on the second floor of the building. Their discovery, combined with the male victim found deceased by firefighters battling the blaze, brought the death tally to five, all of whom appeared to be transients.

 

No firefighters sustained injury in the firefight, investigation or recovery operations.

 

A positive identification of the dead persons, to include the cause, time and manner of their death will be determined by the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner.

 

© Photo by John Conkle

 

LAFD Incident: 061316-1267

 

Connect with us: LAFD.ORG | News | Facebook | Instagram | Reddit | Twitter: @LAFD @LAFDtalk

Upper East Side, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States

 

Fire Engine Company 39 and Ladder Company 16 Station House is an outstanding example of late nineteenth century civic architecture. Built in 1884-86, the six-story Romanesque Revival structure was designed by N. LeBrun & Son for the headquarters of the New York Fire Department and to provide fire protection in a neighborhood that was experiencing considerable growth and change. Between 1879 and 1894 LeBrun was closely associated with the department, designing more than 40 buildings. Unlike many modest mid-block firehouses, the East 67th Street building served multiple functions, providing space for two fire companies, the offices of the Commissioners, and various departmental bureaux. Restored in 1992, the East 67th Street building provides a superb centerpiece in one of New York's best-preserved rows of nineteenth century public architecture.'

 

The Fire Department of the City of New York

 

From its first days as a Dutch colony to the end of the Civil War, New York City relied on unpaid volunteers to help extinguish fires. While under Dutch rule all men were expected to participate, under the British, a force of thirty volunteers was organized by the General Assembly of the Colony in 1737 to operate two Newsham hand pumpers that had been recently imported from London. After the Revolution, a few tentative steps were taken to give fire- fighting a more professional character. Authorized by the New York State Legislature in 1798, the Volunteer Fire Department of the City of New York was placed under the supervision of a paid engineer and six subordinates.

 

Over the next half century, the city grew and so did the number of volunteer firemen, which increased from 600 in 1800 to more than 4,000 by I860. Despite growing numbers, the department was frequently criticized for its poor performance. Disapproval was especially strong during the Civil War, a period when many members of the force resigned to serve in the Union Army, leaving the department without sufficient personnel. Under such circumstances, interest grew in creating a paid, stable, professional force - like that of the Metropolitan Police District. Advocates maintained, based on recent experience in Albany, Boston, Buffalo, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and London, a paid force would be better equipped to protect the city from fires.

 

On May 30, 1865, the New York State Legislature established the Metropolitan Fire District, comprising the cities of New York and Brooklyn. The act abolished the old volunteer system and created the Metropolitan Fire Department, under the jurisdiction of the state government. This action had two goals: first, to improve fire protection, and second, to limit the influence of the long-dominant Tammany political machine, whose members frequently used service in the department to advance their private careers. Results were immediate; by the end of 1865, thousands of volunteers had retired and numerous companies were disbanded, to be replaced by thirty-three engine companies and twelve ladder companies operated by a force of five hundred men. Furthermore, in an effort to filter out any lingering Tammany influence, the Commissioners banned firehouse construction for five years.

 

Under Genera! Alexander T. Shaler, who served as President of the Board of Fire Commissioners between 1867 and 1870, many important changes were initiated. A former volunteer fireman and decorated Civil War general who served in the prestigious Seventh Regiment, he reorganized the department "according to a military model in which specialization, discipline, and merit were encouraged by a system of daily advisory orders, trials for disobedience, and ranks.'"* Despite the Metropolitan Fire Department's generally excellent record, with a steady decline in annual property losses, the City sought and regained permanent control of the department under the Charter of 1870 (commonly known as the "Tweed Charter").

 

During the 1860s and 1870s there was increasing pressure to expand and improve service. Not only did the city nearly double in size with the annexation of the western portion of the Bronx in 1874, but the growing number of tall buildings placed new demands on the practice of fire-fighting. In response, funds were spent to upgrade the department's equipment and training. An improved fire alarm telegraph was purchased, as well as gas floodlights, taller ladders, and steam engines with increased pumping pressure for all companies. Classes in the use of this equipment and life-saving techniques were organized, as well as a School of Instruction for Foremen and Engineers of steamers in 1878 and a school for uniformed men in 1883.^ Support for the paid department remained strong which resulted in increased public funding and growing pride among members of the force.

 

History of the Site

 

Since the late seventeenth century much of East 67th Street has been publicly owned. Despite discussion by the Common Council to lease the so-called "Dove Lots" for private development in April 1806/ by 1813 the blocks between Third and Fifth Avenue and from East 66th to East 68th Street had been set aside as a fifteen-acre square named after the former Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton. Following the Civil War, however, the park was closed. Streets were soon extended through the site and lots in the western half were sold to developers.

 

During the 1870s the Upper East Side underwent considerable development. While much of the area did become residential, the blocks east of Park Avenue between 66th Street and 68th Street retained their public and institutional character. Describing the site of the future headquarters, the New reported: "The neighborhood is a constant wonder to visitors to New-York because of the great group of public institutions — medical, charitable, and educational — that are built within a stone's throw of one another. These included Presbyterian, Mount Sinai and German Hospitals, the Normal College, Grammar School No. 76, and the Asylum for the Improved Instruction of Deaf-mutes, as well as the Lenox Library and the Seventh Regiment Armory (1877-79, Charles W. Clinton, a designated New York City Landmark).

 

Engine Company No. 39 was organized in a small building on the site in March 1875. Although the Upper East Side would become one of Manhattan's most prestigious neighborhoods by the turn of the century, at this time it was a district marked by strong contrasts. On the blocks immediately to the west of the firehouse were mostly private residences, and to the east, tenements, cigar factories, and "streets infested with gangs of the worst ruffians in the city."^

 

These differences may have been viewed as an obstacle to future residential development. East 67th street, consequently, became a logical location for the new department headquarters. Not only would such a public project serve to stabilize the neighborhood, but in terms of geography and access the area had other advantages as well. Set midway between the more-established districts and fire companies to the south and the new suburban companies in upper Manhattan and the Bronx, the slightly elevated site on Lenox Hill afforded extensive views in all directions. Furthermore, it was well- served by public transportation. With a station of the Third Avenue elevated train at the comer of East 67th Street, the site was convenient for both staff and visitors.

 

The Fire Department Headquarters

 

The East 67th Street structure was the first and only headquarters building constructed by the New York City Fire Department.^ It replaced the former Firemen's Hall, a three-story Italianate structure designed by the architects Field & Correjaat 155-157 Mercer Street (1853- 54, SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District).'" Built by the City of New York for the use of New York Hose Company No. 5 and Lafayette Hook and Ladder Company No. 6, it served primarily as gathering place for various groups associated with the volunteer department. The upper stories, which were known for their opulent interiors, contained a library, meeting hall, and committee rooms."

 

The Metropolitan Fire Department converted Firemen's Hall into its headquarters in 1865, replacing an earlier facility at 21 Elizabeth Street. This relocation symbolized a new era. No longer associated with the excesses of past political administrations, the building became an administrative center, with departmental offices, a library for the firemen, and a room for the fire alarm telegraph which had been repaired and moved from City Hall in 1867.

 

From Mercer Street the department directed an extremely ambitious building campaign. Although the Metropolitan Fire Department's ban on the construction of new firehouses ended in 1870, it took nearly a decade until building actually resumed. In 1884, approximately midway in the campaign, a design for the East 67th Street site was approved. The need for a much larger facility had been evident for more than a decade, but not until 1879 when a series of fires in the dry goods district came dangerously close to destroying the headquarters, was such a move justified.'^ Advocates were particularly concerned about the fate of the telegraph, a communications system that linked ail engine houses, watch towers, and fireboxes to the central headquarters.

 

Mayor Franklin Edson, who strongly supported relocation, addressed the problem in 1883 noting "the rather anomalous and startling fact that the Headquarters of the Fire Department is itself in danger of destruction at any time, the consequences of which might be disastrous beyond measure . . . the first step should be to provide a triplicate set of communicating apparatus and place it in a secure spot, and the next should be to erect a suitable fire-proof building, with proper provision in it for the important and growing Bureau of Inspection of Buildings, which is now crowded into a single room of this admirably arranged and methodically conducted Department."'^

 

Napoleon LeBrun & Sons, Architect

 

Napoleon Eugene Charles LeBrun (1821- 1901) was chosen to design the new headquarters, an architect known for both his ecclesiastical commissions and pioneering fireproof designs. Bom to French immigrant parents in Philadelphia, as a teenager he apprenticed with Thomas Ustick Walter (1804-87), the Philadelphia architect responsible for numerous public commissions in the neo-classical style, including Girard College of Orphans (Philadelphia, 1833-48), the United States Capitol Extension (Washington, D.C., 1851) and dome (Washington, D.C.,1856). In 1841 LeBrun established his own firm, designing numerous churches and public buildings in the Philadelphia area, including the Roman Catholic Cathedral of SS. Peter and Paul (1846-64) and the Academy of Music (1852-57). After 1864 LeBrun relocated his firm to New York City where he received a number of high-profile commissions, including Masonic Hall (1870-75. demolished), at the southeast comer of 23rd Street and Sixth Avenue.

 

Chosen by public competition, the French Second Empire design did much to establish the firm's reputation.'^

 

Over the next three decades, LeBrun designed a great variety of structures, including churches, tenements, and several office towers.'^ Among his clients, the New York City Fire Department proved to be the most significant. Contact began in 1879 when LeBrun served as the AIA representative on the Board of Examiners of the Building Bureau of the Fire Department. Between 1879 and 1894, he received more than forty commissions from the department, including numerous engine houses in Manhattan and the Bronx, a warehouse, and fire pier. It was during these productive years that both of his sons, Pierre LeBrun and Michel LeBrun joined the firm and its name was subsequently altered to N. LeBrun & Son (and later. Sons) to acknowledge their increasing roles.

 

The Building

 

Among the four public buildings that presently stand on East 67th Street between

 

Lexington and Third Avenues, the Fire Department's headquarters was the first (and largest) to be completed. Construction commenced in 1884 and lasted nearly two years. Engine Company No. 39, newly organized Ladder Company 16,'^ and various departmental agencies were consolidated in the new "practically fire-proof building. As completed, the building and its furnishings cost more than $175,000.^ Most of the interior was devoted to administrative offices, which for several years had leased additional space on Mercer Street, and training facilities, that had been "kindly permitted the use of an unoccupied building at the foot of West One Hundred and Fifty-eighth street."'^

 

LeBrun, who is credited with standardizing firehouse design in New York, organized the building's plan as follows: the ground floor was used primarily to store fire-fighting apparatus for the engine companies and the second floor provided rooms for the uniformed men, including their dormitory, offices, and kitchen. Though most of the ground floor was set aside for the two companies, to the right at the base of the tower was the entrance to the fire headquarters. An hydraulic elevator and stairs led up to the third floor to the offices of the Commissioners and the Chief of the Department and staffs. On the fourth floor was the Department Attorney and the Bureau of Inspection of Buildings; the fifth was assigned to the Bureau of Combustibles, the School of Instruction and the Medical Officers; and the sixth provided space for the Fire Alarm Telegraph and the Bureau of the Fire Marshall.^

 

From the eastern side of the top floor, one ascended to the belfry by stairs, and then to the observatory, where a "fireman detailed as watchman constantly scanned the horizon for evidences of fire."*' Based more on fire-fighting tradition than actual use, the decision to erect a 150 foot-tall tower had much to do with civic imagery, symbolizing the department and its important public function. Within two decades of the building's construction, nearby apartment towers would start to obscure the observatory's once-panoramic views.

 

During his long career, LeBrun worked in a number of popular styles. As in many of his department commissions, he employed Romanesque Revival details — round-arched windows, drip molds, and organic ornament — juxtaposed against smooth red brick. Although the decoration owed a clear debt to H. H. Richardson and his much-praised public work of the late 1870s and after, Engine Company No. 39 also incorporated French Second Empire motifs such as the mansard roof and the pyramidally-capped tower. As one of LeBrun's earliest office buildings, the elevation has a somewhat tentative quality, reflecting the much- discussed Tribune Building (1873-75, demolished) designed by Richard Morris Hunt. Although LeBrun did not use neo-Grec detailing as Hunt did in his design, he did model its composition after the Renaissance palazzo formula the noted architect helped develop, placing a brick tower on a two-story brownstone base capped by a mansard roof pierced by dormers. In addition, both projects featured a tower with look-out balcony.

 

A reception was held to celebrate the building's completion in April 1887. Guests were invited to inspect the oak interiors, climb the tower, and watch a display in the rear yard of the latest fire-fighting techniques. 77te Record and GMidf commented: "The Fire Department headquarters would be worthy of praise whoever had built it. but it deserves special praise as having been done under the direction of a municipal department and giving the taxpayers something worth tooking at for their money.""

 

Subsequent History

 

By 1914 the headquarters had outgrown the upper floors of the East 67th Street building, retocating its offices to the eleventh floor of the recently completed Municipal Building at 1 Centre Street. The fire telegraph, however, remained until it was moved to Central Park in 1922. For much of the twentieth century the building served as the department's training center. With the introduction of motorized vehicles in 1907^ the stables at the rear were eliminated and replaced by a small brick extension. In 1913 several structures were constructed in the yard facing East 68th Street, including a sprinkler and ventilating test house. In 1949 the former headquarters' most prominent feature, the lookout tower, was removed from the top of the eastern bay.

 

During the early 1970s the city proposed to demolish the firehouse and adjacent police precinct station house and incorporate.them into the planned expansion of Hunter College designed by the architect Ulrich Franzen. In January 1980 the Landmarks Commission designated four buildings on the block as New York City Landmarks. Although the Board of Estimate overturned the designation of the firehouse and police precinct in June 1980, the various agencies involved did agree to meet to discuss alternative strategies. In 1982, a new scheme, designed by the Stein Partnership, was approved that preserved the facades of both structures while constructing a new combined facility behind them?* As completed in 1992, the building's facade was completely restored, including cast-stone replacements for its greatly deteriorated brownstone.

 

Although the building still serves its original function as an Engine and Ladder Company, the floors once occupied by the Commissioners and their staff are now connected to, and used by, the 19th Police Precinct, linked by a five-story granite structure set back thirty feet from the sidewalk. Originally used as a narrow passage to the rear yard on 68th Street, this recessed addition incorporates a new, third, apparatus bay for Fire Department vehicles.

 

Building Description

 

Fire Engine Company 39 and Ladder Company 16 Station house is a six-story Romanesque Revival structure with a red brick, gray granite, and brownstone facade. The first two floors, covered with rusticated brownstone, house the companies. The first floor has two equal-sized apparatus bays surfaced in cast iron that have been painted a bright red. Each garage door incorporates a pair of single-pane windows. The pier between the doors is also clad in cast iron and includes five narrow vertical panels with three leaf-like decorative motifs near the top. Above each entrance is an I-beam decorated with a string of five raised rosettes framed by a pair of salamander heads facing inward, a common symbol for fire fighters.^ Installed above these beams are two signs of nearly identical size with gold capital lettering on a black background that identify each company.

 

On the right side of the first floor is the former entrance to the fire department headquarters marked by an elaborate stone portico supported by a pair of pink polished granite columns set on engaged granite pedestals. The upper portion, which underwent extensive restoration, features an inset segmental arch crowned by checkerboard patterning. The swirling engaged basket capitals that spring from the freestanding columns are particularly elaborate, as are the wave flame motifs just above the capitals. Between the columns an office and firehouse entry has been inserted, consisting of a single door on the left and an iron bay window with visible rivets supported by a small girder set at an angle. Above this addition is an I-beam which creates a transom over which an open grille covers an air-conditioner. All of these 1992 additions have been painted dark green to match the window moldings on each of the five floors above.

 

The second floor, which is also used by the companies, has two sets of three double-hung windows aligned above the vehicular entrances. Between each set a flagpole has been installed. In the right-hand bay, above the original entrance to the headquarters, is a single window framed by a pair of recessed tablets, each surrounded by billet moldings arranged in the shape of an octagon with floral designs at each comer. The right inscription reads:

 

FIRE/ DEPARTMENT/ HEADQUARTERS/ LIFE-SAVING CORPS/ & SCHOOL OF/ PROBATION/ ORGANIZED/ 1882

 

The left:

 

A.D. 1886/ COMMISSIONERS/ HENRY D. PURROY/ PRESIDENT/ RICHARD CROKER/ ELWARD SMITH/ N.LEBRUN & SON/ ARCHITECTS

 

A continuous dentil molding divides the second and third stories, marking a clear division between the facilities for the companies and the former headquarters. As in the floor below, there are three groups of windows, all with brownstone surrounds and a continuous zigzag molding which ends in blocks carved with organic ornament at the impost level. The right- hand bay has a single round-arch window with a stone transom through which the zigzag molding intersects. Twisted columns frame this double- hung window, and its spandrel is decorated with a checkerboard panel. The much larger arched tripartite windows that align with the firehouse entries, have floral moldings on the surrounds and generously sized oval balconies which rest on piers that divide the second story windows below. Each balustrade, which was restored in 1992, has polished granite colonnettes with elaborate brownstone capitals and bases.

 

The fourth story has five double-hung windows of identical size. A single round-arch window is positioned at right, while two sets of paired round-arch windows are aligned above the apparatus bays. Each of these windows has brownstone sills terminating in bosses and identical lintels with raised billet work.

 

On the fifth floor are seven double-hung windows with brownstone arches. There is a single window in the right-hand bay, while the rest are arranged in groups of three, divided by four gray polished granite columns with brownstone capitals and bases. A continuous brownstone sill, terminating in bosses, extends beneath the six windows.

 

The top story is divided into two parts: the base that remains from the demolished tower, and a heavily ornamented cornice above which a dark slate roof rises. The mansard roof incorporates two brownstone dormers, each lighted by a pair of round-arch windows set beneath a triangular pediment carved with a diagonal grid of ornament and topped by circular medallions. Along the left edge of the slate roof, supported by the cornice, is a brownstone chimney. The tower bay at right has double- arched windows with a brownstone sill. Just above these windows is the building's highest point, marked by an unomamented brownstone cornice and a row of four small brownstone corbels.

 

The building's east and west elevations are almost entirely new brick construction. The east elevation, which is not visible, except from a narrow passage between the firehouse and synagogue, has two pairs of flat-arched tripartite windows with projecting gray granite sills that are located close to the front of the building on the fifth and sixth floors, as well as four windows set in row between the second and third floors.

 

To the west, set back approximately thirty feet from the street is a gray granite addition, linking the firehouse and police station. The ground level serves as a third apparatus bay for the firehouse, while the floors above, each with a set of two windows, are used by the police precinct. AH of these windows are set behind fiat-arched screens with transoms, except for the fifth floor which are shaped like rectangles. Here the west elevation of the firehouse is clearly visible, clad entirely in red brick. There is a single window at the second, third, and fourth levels, each with projecting granite sills. On the fourth floor is a second, smaller window in which a security camera has been installed.

 

- From the 1998 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

“We were telling stories, trying to guess if the tale told was fact or fiction. M… came up with this story, chilling in the way it was so wretchedly confessed to us. Most of us thought it was fact, but didn’t really want to believe it.

(read fact or fiction? At the end of the background section)

 

BACKGROUND

The Algonquin Round Table was a celebrated group of New York City writers, critics, actors and wits. Gathering initially as part of a practical joke, members of "The Vicious Circle", as they dubbed themselves, met for lunch each day at the Algonquin Hotel from 1919 until roughly 1929. At these luncheons they engaged in wisecracks, wordplay and witticisms that, through the newspaper columns of Round Table members, were disseminated across the country.

"Their form of social media was just that: social. Imagine having the time every day to break for a couple hours to have lunch with your funny, intelligent friends? They didn’t post witty replies on Facebook. They said them face-to-face, such as the time Dorothy Parker was asked to use the word “horticulture” in a sentence: “You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.” Was her response.

 

Daily association with each other, both at the luncheons and outside of them, inspired members of the Circle to collaborate creatively. The entire group worked together successfully only once, however, to create a revue called No Sirree! which helped launch a Hollywood career for Round Tabler Robert Benchley.

 

In its ten years of association, the Round Table and a number of its members acquired national reputations both for their contributions to literature and for their sparkling wit. Although some of their contemporaries, and later in life even some of its members, disparaged the group, its reputation has endured long after its dissolution.

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

An elderly lady known to one of us was visited with quite often before she passed on. She was a school chum of Tallulah and related this Roundtable tale told to her.

We would be quite interested to learn more of the story and possibly about the incident retold below. If anyone is aware of an occurrence similar to this one in or even outside of Pennsylvania please feel free to tell us about it.

 

Fact or Fiction?

“We were playing a game, telling each other stories, and then trying to guess if the story was fact or fiction. M… came up with this story, chilling in the way it was so wretchedly confessed to us. Most of us thought it was fact, but didn’t really want to believe it had occurred.

“I give the story as best I can through memory, only ever hearing it the one time. I believe I have captured its’ essence, but I could never in words captured the tortured look, or trembling manner that was shown when it was told before the group. All I can say is, either way; it was a masterful performance….”

The Confession:

M lit a cigarette, and after sending a few wisps of smoke up to dance upon the ceiling, began the tale…

“I have done may things in my life I have later regretted, but this one, in particular, I have never told a living soul until now….” Drawing a deep breath, the story was continued.

 

“I have always had a curious streak to observe people’s reactions when in various situations to get a better grasp of how my characters should act. It greatly piqued me to watch, without being seen, a person’s true emotions coming into play. Ralph Waldo Emerson once famously quoted that “ People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character” ... and that intriguing thought was what originally sent me on my quest..

 

Sometimes I was the protagonist behind the scenes who unbeknownst to the victims had set them up. Sometimes I just followed and watched their behavior. I never intended for anyone to get hurt, emotionally or physically. But sometimes they did! Then I would solace my conscience by telling it that I was only doing it to improve upon my craft. But, then this one time, I probably did go a little too far….”

 

“As a young man I would attend all different sorts of functions from all different levels of society to come up with ideas. I ran the gauntlet, from cock fights, hobo’s gathering around a campfire, to a wedding reception worthy of the Rockefellers. I noticed that I felt more at home with the former, than the latter. A condition, I am sure, caused by some flaw in my character. “

 

“But this instance, the function I encountered definitely belonged to the latter, Rockefeller, set. The event, I learned, was the Homecoming of a small private College in a wealthy Pennsylvania community. Not my Alma Mater, but just a place I happened to be passing through which I had stopped whilst traveling home. “

 

“That there was a function going on in that little place was not hard to miss; the attendees were pouring out onto the streets from all sorts of establishments, and into others, including the bar I was holed up in. After a while I noticed a change in dress of the revelers costumes. School blazers and sensible dresses began to be replaced by tuxes, top hats, and swishing satin gowns and colourful frocks. Their adornments also changed, from school ties to bow ties for the men: Gold jewelry was replaced by sparkling necklaces and rings upon gloved hands for the ladies.”

 

“Another change was by then the lot of them was pretty much plastered, but then, so was I! Finally I was flushed out of my hiding spot , and went for a walk outside to escape the noisy crowd. I started to circle the upper portion of a large rural park that ran next to my late hiding spot. As I strolled, I noticed a man with a heavy coat and cap, rather sinisterly watching the crowd, standing against a tree just up ahead of me. When he saw me coming towards him, he turned down a path leading into the shadowy depths of the woods. I watched him go down for a minute, and observed that it led down to a small valley, where in the middle, surrounded by trees, stood a football field. The path less traveled tonight, I thought to myself. I kept to the path well-travelled however, and soon after turning a corner, came upon a young couple snogging on a bench. I stopped to watch, my mind racing with a mixture of drink inspired contemplations upon the little scene before me! “

 

“She was dolled up like a picture actress. Wearing a slithery glossy red gown that shined in the gas lamps pooling light, with matching gloves and a shimmering gold purse, she was a breathing Pygmalion . The jewels she was adorned with, rhinestones, I assumed, glittered happily as she moved. He was in a tux, an Errol Flynn moustache and gold watch chain and fob at his waist. They had no idea anyone was near them. Then, my cursed foot gave me away all too soon, as it stepped upon a twig, snapping it loudly, calling the couples attention to my peeping. Seeing me they got up and walked past me, snooty noses up in the air. She made a rude noise that would have better fitted an old mare in a barn. Well pardon my eyes I though, stinging from the obvious smite upon my character, which I always had held in high regard. Why dress in that manner and think no one deserves to take notice unless they meet with your approval? The princess was obviously not amused…”

 

“ I watched with disdain, and then , still transfixed, followed at a discreet distance as they walked back the way I had come. For some reason I was mesmerized by the pair of snobs, watching as they moved, her red gown swishing and swirling like a red waterfall upon the paved stones. They were holding closely onto one another, once again totally oblivious to their surroundings. “

 

“They stopped, and I went into the shadow of a tree. Looking back up the path they had come, I thought they may have seen my shadow. They then looking again to each other, she murmured something and they turned down the very path, the path less travelled, that the heavy coated man had slinked away down. I felt maybe I should have cautioned them against taking that path, but I remembered their rude reaction, besides, I was curious to see if anything would happen. In for pence, in for a pound I remember repeating to myself, as I discreetly continued my stalk.”

 

“I went into the shadows, seeing a large set of rocks beside the path I climbed up, getting a view of the path winding down into the small valley. I was just above a gas lamp that lit the path as it reached the valley floor below. The lamps lite effectively shadowed the rock whence I was perched. I could see the pair walking in and out of the shadows of the trees. Just as they reached the circle of light below me they stopped and embraced. I watched, totally unabashed. Then, as I grew bored, or maybe my drink induced fog was started to clear my mind back to reality, I slowly started to make an exit stage right , when a shadow detached itself from a tree directly below me. I stayed mute and froze in my tracks, watching the event I knew was going to occur, began to unfold. The man’s shadowy figure approached the oblivious couple carefully, I could see his head jerking about making sure that the couple was alone, and unprotected. Picking up a chunk of wood he entered the circle of light, which now formed a small stage where a tragedy worthy of Shakespeare was about to unfold!”

 

“I watched as the startled lovers became aware and tried to stare down the newcomer. Now in the light, I could see He had shed his coat and gained a mask, but it was definitely the same sinister man I had seen earlier, obviously up to no good. The Errol Flynn wannabe put the girl behind him in defense, the masked man merely raised branch and whacked him on the side of his head, it broke with a sickening crunch, and her defender went down like a sack of cement. He then turned his attention to the now helpless damsel in distress. Raising a cupped hand up he said something in a raspy voice that startled her. Apparently he was asking for her jewels, and the horror struck damsel had arrogantly not yet realized she was being mugged. The ladies long earrings shimmering as she shook her head no in response. The rings on her gloved fingers flashed as her hand went to her throat as she cried out,” not my necklace”, in a hapless act of defiance. In my mind came a picture of a small kitten trying to defy a snarling wolf. She threw the gold purse at him, but he merely caught it, and placed it in his pocket. I remember feeling strangely detached, It may have been shock, but I found myself watching without one ounce of regret. The only thought I could remember was her glittering necklace, maybe they had not been rhinestones, which meant that she was wealthy and probably had been looking down her snooty nose upon me. Well than she obviously did not want my help, I decided, like she had not wanted my looking at her earlier. So, I decided that I wasn’t going to help unless absolutely life or death. Let the little lamb be trimmed of her rich wool I said to myself. She did show spunk, I will admit, but that’s all it was, a show. She went limp as he reached up, grabbing her hand away, than began pulling of the rings as she stood mute with disbelief. The diamond bracelet was wrenched unceremoniously from her wrist. Dropping her hand, he pocketed her rings and bracelet. Than he once again went for her necklace, and she backed up, shaking her head, earrings again shimmering as the pair bounced away from her long hair. Then I saw a flash of silver in his hand, and she fainted dead away at the sight of his ugly blade…”.

 

“The man knelt over to her fallen body. The shiny red gown had spilled around her on the ground, Laying like a pool of red lava. Reaching down and he claimed her necklace, grabbing it up from her throat. He looked at it for a few seconds, letting it sparkle in the moon’s light like slivery falling rain. Then squatting beside her, he pulled away her hair, and yanked her earrings free. He methodically felt along her figure, missing nothing. Then he again produced the knife, slicing off the brooch from her gown’s sash. He pulled off her red high heels and threw tem deep into the woods. Then he left her and went over to the unconscious escort, the bloody limb next to him. ‘Errol’s’, watch chain and fob were pulled free and pocketed. Then he reached in and pulled out the unlucky devils pocket book. Then pulling off ‘Errol’s’ shoes they soon joined the ladies high heels. Arising calmly, he slowly looked around as he stowed the stolen articles and his knife away. He spent a split second longer on the area I was hidden, causing a shiver to make itself felt! Then, removing the mask he walked to where his long coat lay, and reclaiming it, he continued serenely on his way down the path. I watched in heavy silence as he disappeared in the woods, only to reappear by the football field. It was then that I stole away back up the path, careful not to be seen.”

 

“And no, I did not give any cry of alarm, did not involve myself by seeking or giving the hapless couple aid. I simply turned and left. I came away with nothing, no ideas, no new feelings for a character, just a sour taste in my mouth and an upset stomach, which I soon tried to relieve by stopping in at the next drinking establishment I came across. About an hour later I heard a siren and sensed commotion outside the confides of my prison. I did not go out to investigate. I left the next morning, daring not to read a paper, and put the place and its memories to my back. “

 

“Ashamedly I did not render any assistance those poor souls, and I admit what I what I did was criminal.. But then, they ……… Yes?”

 

“It was at this point that the confession was interrupted by the appearance of a messenger boy sent for M….. Who took his leave, with a wicked smile that seemed to convey relief that an outcome of the story would not have to be faced? Obliviously loving the mystery it created by the timely appearance of the messenger.” He never could be persuaded to return to his story only smiling that wicked little smile.

So, the worse of it was we never knew… because of the messenger boy’s interruption, never to learn to our satisfaction if the story was true or not..”

“How we all did hate that!”

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

There is some question as to the identity of M…. There are six members with M in their initial. It could have been a non-regular or even a nickname. If anyone else has heard of this tale, or could place a finger for us as to who M… may have been, we would welcome the enlightenment.

 

Charter members of the Round Table included:

Franklin Pierce Adams, columnist

Robert Benchley, humorist and actor

Heywood Broun, columnist and sportswriter (married to Ruth Hale)

Marc Connelly, playwright

Ruth Hale, freelance writer who worked for women's rights

George S. Kaufman, playwright and director

Dorothy Parker

“The cure for boredom is curiosity. There is no cure for curiosity.”

“If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to.”

“What fresh hell is this?”

Robert E. Sherwood, author and playwright

John Peter Toohey, publicist

Alexander Woollcott, critic and journalist

"The English have an extraordinary ability for flying into a great calm."

 

Membership was not official or fixed for so many others who moved in and out of the Circle. Some of these included:

Tallulah Bankhead, actress

Edna Ferber, author and playwright

Margalo Gillmore, actress

Jane Grant, journalist and feminist (married to Ross)

Beatrice Kaufman, editor and playwright (married to George S. Kaufman)

Margaret Leech, writer and historian

Neysa McMein, magazine illustrator

Harpo Marx, comedian and film star

Alice Duer Miller, writer

Donald Ogden Stewart, playwright and screenwriter

Frank Sullivan, journalist and humorist

Deems Taylor, composer

Estelle Winwood, actress

Peggy Wood, actress

 

Courtesy of Chatwick University Archives

 

Catacombs, Montparnasse, Paris

 

I decided that today was a day for going underground, and I set off to Montparnasse to visit the catacombs. These are a vast maze of tunnels under Paris originally used for quarrying the stone out of which the city's main buildings are constructed. In the late 18th Century, the state of the city's churchyards had become so disgusting that the city removed the bones from all of them. They were brought here at night, the carts coming from the centre of the city accompanied by torch-bearing acolytes and priests chanting the requiem Mass. A skull count showed that almost six million corpses were removed in this way. They were buried deep underground, but these people being Parisians the skulls and bones were arranged in a neat and methodical way, a meaningful chaos. Layers of tibia and femurs are crowned by a layer of pelvises and skulls, and so on. Each churchyard was grouped together, and a plaque shows which parish provided the skeletons.

 

The work was interrupted by the French Revolution,which provided plenty more corpses for when the work was resumed. Altogether about a kilometre and a half of tunnels were filled with the remains of dead Parisians, and you can walk through them on a winding route under the streets around Montparnasse station. In fact, this is just a tiny fraction of the tunnels. The catacombs extend for hundreds of kilometres under the city, many of them rarely explored and difficult of access. Because of this, they are regularly broken into by intrepid adventurers, and many legends have grown up about parts of the network. However, my favourite story is one which is true.

 

In 2004, a group of police cadets on a training exercise were given the task of tracking an imaginary criminal in a part of the network which was little known. They got into the system through a manhole, and when they were about a hundred feet underground something rather odd happened. They triggered a motion sensor which set off the sound of barking dogs. Thinking that it was part of the exercise, they headed onwards only to come out into a vast cavern which had been fully equipped as a cinema. An anteroom had been equipped and fully stocked as a bar, and there was also a film storage room. When the cadets reported what they had seen, the electricity board were sent in to work out where the invaders were getting their electricity from. Instead, they found the wires all cut, the equipment removed, and a sign saying 'Don't try to follow us. You'll never find us.'

 

Perhaps the cineastes had got fed up with waiting to get into the system officially, because this was the only place all week that I encountered a serious queue. Worse, I was just in front of a small group of people who talked constantly in very loud voices. She was an American who obviously lived in Paris, and they appeared to be young relatives who'd come to stay. She was taking them down the catacombs, and the price to be paid for this by the poor kids was to suffer her pretentious nonsense. She went on about spirituality, and homeopathy, and psychoanalysis, and the inner energy, and so on. Fair play to the kids, they responded enthusiastically enough.

 

And then she got out some of her stream of consciousness poetry, and started reading it in a loud voice. Well, goodness me. I was put in mind of something the graphic artist Alan Moore said when he was in Hollywood helping turn his 'V for Vendetta' into a film, and he was asked at a director's lunch why he lived in Northampton, England. "Because it keeps me grounded", he replied, and I thought that this was exactly right. It was like the opposite of this pompous woman, although to be fair to her I expect that if I went to live in Paris I would also disappear up my own backside.

 

The catacombs are brilliant, worth every minute of the queuing time, worth every insufferable stream of consciousness adjective. And then I went and did some shopping.

 

You can read my account of my travels at pariswander.blogspot.co.uk.

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 2.8, Shutter speed of 1/400 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:29 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/500 and Focal Length of 24.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:18 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/320 and Focal Length of 55.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:09 EST PM

Ancient Thonetschlössl, District Museum

Object ID: 32954 Josef Deutsch-Platz 2

Former Capuchin monastery of 1631, 1785 secularized and acquired in 1786 by Giacomo Cagliano. Altgräfin (grandduchess) Elise von Salm the building had rebuilt similar to a castle. In 1889, it was acquired by the Thonet family, 1930/31 by the Savings Bank of the City of Mödling that housed there the since 1904 existing District Museum.

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_denkmalgesch%C3%BCtzten_O...

 

(further information you can get by clicking on the link at the end of page!)

History

 

Plaque to the founder of the Hyrtl'schen orphanage Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel

© IMAREAL / E. Vavra

The Biedermeier-influenced city on the edge of the Vienna Woods is the capital of the district Mödling in the south of Vienna. The town has experienced in its 1100-year history since the first mention very different phases: in the Middle Ages briefly Babenberg residence, for centuries an economically potent wine market, from the 19th Century summer resort and industrial center, since 1875 town, in the 20th Century for almost two decades XXIVth district of Vienna, since 1954 again an independent municipality of Lower Austria and as a school and garden city popular residential area in the vicinity of Vienna.

Mödling has partnerships with cities in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy.

The historical tradition of Mödling goes back far beyond the first written mention, how settlement finds from the Neolithic Age, Hallstatt period (eg calendar mountain) and Roman times as well as the great Avar burial ground "at the Golden Staircase" from the 7/8th Century BCE prove. In the year 903 Mödling is first mentioned (Medilihha). The later settlement was probably made in the 11th Century beneath an early castle building on the church mountain (Kirchenberg), where later a Romanesque predecessor of Othmar church was built.

In the late 12th century Mödling was for a few decades the residence of a Babenberg branch line. Henry the Elder, a brother of Duke Leopold V., had since the 1170 century belongings in and around Mödling. He and his son Henry the Younger, calling himself "Duke of Mödling", resided on the castle probably built around 1150 in the Klausen, among whose most famous visitors was Walther von der Vogelweide. With the death of Henry the Younger in 1236 extinguished the Mödlinger line of the Babenberg and the reign became princely domain. The time of the Babenberg commemorates the in late 12th Century built Romanesque ossuary at Othmar church - a circular building with an apse - as well as the denomination "Babenberg".

In the late Middle Ages, Medlich developed into a major wine market (1343 mention of market town) which in the 15th Century as one of the four princely spell markets was also represented in the Parliament - in addition to Gumpoldskirchen, Langenlois and Perchtoldsdorf. For centuries shaped the wine-growing the economy and social structure. The Mödlinger wine was good and helped the market particularly in the 15th and 16th Century to its prosperity. The settlement reached at the end of the Middle Ages that extent, which until the 19th Century should remain essentially unchanged. The center formed ​​the area around the Schrannenplatz with a dense stand of late medieval and early modern town houses that bear evidence of the wealth and self-confidence of the citizens of the market town. From the late medieval Schrannen building, the official residence of the market judge, was created in 1548 the representative Renaissance town hall with loggia.

The elevated lying Othmar church became in the 15th Century by transferring the rights of the church of St. Martin parish church of Mödling. The massive late Gothic church was built in a nearly 70-year construction period from 1454 to 1523 on the walls of six predecessors and able to resist fortified. As Mödling was destroyed in 1529 by the Ottomans, the just completed church lost its roof and remained for over a century till the restoration in 1660/70 a ruin. On the Merian engraving from 1649 the uncovered Othmar church on the left side is clearly visible. As a temporary parish church served the about 1450 built late-Gothic hospital church.

The internal conditions at this time were mainly marked of the clashes of the market with the princely rule Burg Mödling - since 1558 combined with the rule of Liechtenstein - which reached its climax in 1600 under the energetic administrator Georg Wiesing (1593-1611). During the Reformation, the market largely became Protestant. In the course of recatholicization a Capuchin monastery was founded in 1631, which served as a factory after the repeal under Joseph II and was then bought by the Thonet family (so-called Thonet Schlössel, today Bezirksmuseum).

In Türkenjahr 1683 (besiegement of the Turks) took place in the Othmar church a horrific bloodbath, in which hundreds of people who had sought refuge there were killed. The church was destroyed again, but this time built up rapidly with the market judge Wolfgang Ignaz Viechtl in a few years.

End of the 18th Century occurred in Mödling the settlement of industrial enterprises, especially textile mills that took advantage of the cheaper production possibilities and also its proximity to Vienna. Was decisively shaped the character of the place but by the rise to a summer resort, initiated by Prince Johann I of Liechtenstein beginning of the 19th Century, which acquired in 1807 the rule of Liechtenstein-Mödling with the former family ancestral home. He had the area under enormous cost reforested (Schirmföhren/pinus mugo, acacia, etc.) and transformed to a public park in Romantic style with promenade paths, steep paths and artificial constructions (Black tower, amphitheater, Husarentempel). The ruined castles Mödling and Liechtenstein were restored. The former Liechtenstein'sche landscape park is considered a remarkable example of the garden culture in 1800 and is now a popular tourist destination (1974 Natural Preserve Föhrenberge).

Since the Biedermeier Mödling in the summer was an extremely popular artist hangout. Among the most famous artists of the 19th Century who were inspired by the romantic nature here, were Franz Schubert, Franz Grillparzer, Ferdinand Waldmüller, Ferdinand Raimund and Ludwig van Beethoven, who here worked on one of his major works, the "Missa Solemnis". In the 20th Century settled inter alia Arnold Schönberg, Anton von Webern, Anton Wildgans, Franz Theodor Csokor and Albert Drach temporarily or permanently down. To Beethoven, Schönberg and Wildgans memorials have been established (Beethoven House, Schönberg House, Wildgans archive).

In the second half of the 19th Century Mödling became administrative center (District Court, District administration) and an industrial site and educational location with high schools and colleges (eg educational establishment Francisco-Josephinum). The good traffic situation at the southern railway, the progressive industrialization and the expansion of health facilities (park, Kursalon) led to a rapid expansion of the hitherto for centuries unchanged market. Under mayor Joseph Schöffel (1873-1882), who became famous because of his successful engagement against the deforestation of the Vienna Woods as the "savior of the Vienna Woods", followed the methodical installation of the so-called Schoeffel(before) city - Schöffelvorstadt (New Mödling) east of the Southern Railway and the establishment of workers' settlements. Later followed the exclusive residential areas of the turn of the century with their representative residential buildings. Probably the most important building of the late 19th Century is the Hyrtl'sche orphanage (1886-1889), founded by the Viennese anatomist, Joseph Hyrtl and Joseph Schöffel. The Orphanage church St. Joseph was built on the in 1787 demolished Martin Church.

On 18th November 1875 the emerging market town was raised to the status of a city, two years later the incorporation of Klausen and Vorderbrühl took place. Through the establishment of Great-Vienna under the Nazi regime on 15th October 1938 the young city for 16 years lost its municipal autonomy; 1954 it became again a part of Lower Austria.

Symbol for the characteristic environment of Mödling was the "width pine" on the Anninger whose age goes back to the 16th Century (around 1550). It was a well-known natural landmark and has become the symbol of the city. 1988 died the tree and it had to be removed in 1997 for safety reasons. The remains are now in the Lower Austrian Provincial Museum.

geschichte.landesmuseum.net/index.asp?contenturl=http://g...

Patron of Art Homage to Napoléon Bonaparte Limited Edition 4810 Fountain Pen M

CAD$4,200.00 plus 13% HST.

 

Napoléon is mainly remembered for his military achievements, but he was a true patron of the arts. His glory lives on in the great ‘architecture parlante’ style of the famous Parisian structures built during his reign. In addition to architecture, other arts such as painting, sculpture and the decorative arts also blossomed under his leadership.

 

The overall design of the pen is inspired by the neoclassic style. The pattern of golden bees on dark blue lacquer is inspired by Napoléon’s throne in Fontainebleau, and the sword-shaped clip bears the Napoléonic “N”. The engravings on the cap top – a laurel wreath, imperial crown and an eagle – refer to Napoléon’s coronation insignia. The clip end is decorated with a red stone recalling the coronation ring of Napoleon’s wife Joséphine.The cap is crowned by the Montblanc Emblem in precious resin.

In homage to Napoléon Bonaparte, the handcrafted 18kt solid gold nib bears a portrait of Napoléon with the typical bicorn.

 

Golden Bees importance: CLICK on links to see his Golden Bee images. *********

www.geriwalton.com/the-importance-of-bees-to-napoleon-bon...

 

www.hhantiquejewelry.com/napoleon-bees-jewelry-tomb-child...

 

The Importance of Bees to Napoleon Bonaparte

By Geri Walton | February 8, 2019 | 1

The importance of bees to Napoleon Bonaparte became obvious when he decided to adopt this ancient symbol older than the fleur-de-lys. Supposedly, when Napoleon thought about wearing the imperial purple, he decided to adopt the bee based on the following story:

 

“It was a custom in France, during its early and barbarous ages, that whenever a monarch died, his horse and page were killed and buried with their master, that they might be in ready attendance upon him in the next world. In the year 1658, the tomb of Childeric, the father of Clovis, was discovered [by the archeologist Jean-Jacques Chifflet*], and within it were found the skeleton of a man that of a horse, and part of the skeleton of a youth, concluded to be the remains of Childeric and his companions … a gold signet ring was taken from the finger of the large skeleton; upon it appeared an engraved head, having long hair flowing over the shoulders, and around it the words, ‘Childerici Regis;’ several buckles, massy gold bracelets and a gold head of an ox, supposed to be an image of the idolatrous worship of the deceased. … [In addition,] on further search in the tomb were found a purse, containing a hundred pieces of gold and two hundred pieces of silver, bearing the heads of different emperors of France; a crystal ball or orb, a pike, a battleaxe, the hand, mounting, and blade of a sword; gold tablets and style; the bit and part of the harness of a horse; fragments of a dress or robe; and more than three hundred little bees of the purest gold, their wings behind inlaid with a red stone like cornelian.”[1]

 

When Childeric’s tomb was discovered in 1653, Louis XIV received the treasure, but he wasn’t impressed and stored it at what later became the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. When Napoleon came to power, his advisor, Jean-Jacques-Régis de Cambacérès, suggested he adopt the bee as his personal symbol and mentioned the treasure of Childeric. Napoleon took his advisor’s advice after learning that Childeric had lived between 437 and 481 and that he founded the Merovingian dynasty. Moreover, Napoleon learned that Childeric’s symbol of the bee preceded the fleur-de-lis adopted by his son Clovis.

 

Besides being associated with the Merovingians, Napoleon also wanted to be associated with the Carolingians, a dynasty that reached its peak in AD 800 with the crowning of Charlemagne as the first Emperor of Romans. The spread eagle that Napoleon used on his shield came from the Carolingian founder Charlemagne and was suggested for use by by the Council Commission, made up from members of the Council of State, whose job was to oversee the coronation of Napoleon and his Empress, Josephine. They soon determined:

 

“Even if the arms of Charlemagne were not accurately known, it could still be pointed out … that in the time of Louis le Débonnaire, and doubtless earlier, ‘an eagle of metal was placed in the western portion of the Imperial palace at Aix, and it was always the custom of those who got possession of the palace, first of all to seize upon this eagle.’”[2]

 

It was also pointed out that the fleur de lys would have been inappropriate alongside the Carolingian symbol of the eagle, another reason for selecting the bee. Moreover, some in the Council Commission erroneously suggested that the fleur-de-lys were just badly drawn bees. One twentieth-century historian noted:

 

“The fleurs de lys which had been sown broadcast on the carpets, hangings, and insignia of the Capetian kings would have been scarcely suitable to match with the eagles. Besides, they belonged to the old order of things which was to be forgotten. It was necessary to choose some plant or animal from the heraldic flora or fauna which could be adopted in the place of the fleur de lys, and was yet known to French historical tradition. As nothing suitable of this kind could be found in the Age of Charlemagne, it was necessary to search farther back. … [It was also] remembered that, during the sitting of the National Convention on the 3rd of Brumaire of the year IV, Daubermesnil, speaking in the name of the Committee of Public Instruction, had proposed that the emblem of the State should be a hive swarming with bees, and that it should be placed upon the front of every national building. To which Citizen Barallion had indeed objected that ‘bees were cognizance of several Kings of France of the first dynasty, such as Childebert and Chileric. Besides,’ he added, ‘bees can never be the emblem of the Republic, for is it not well known that they all pay court to a queen?’ The convention was struck with this merry quip, and rejected the harmless suggestion of Daubermesnil.”[3]

Napoleon apparently ignored the idea that bees might be related to a queen and found bees an appropriate symbol for his empire. He knew illusion was power and that the bee had greater antiquity than the fleur-de-lis. He also thought because the bees were a symbol of the Merovingian kings, it would give him added legitimacy to rule as Emperor. Thus, when he was crowned, the importance of bees to Napoleon was obvious as he made sure bees appeared prominently on his coronation robes.

 

To aid in this, he used the best-known miniature painter Jean-Baptiste Isabey, who also happened to be a close friend of the Bonaparte family. Isabey decided the bee found with Childeric’s remains lacked detail and was too small and dense. Therefore, he developed a new larger bee created volant en arrière, or in other words, when viewed from the top its wings were partially opened.

 

Isabey’s bee was the one used to embellish the coronation mantles. Embroidery of the bees on the mantles cost 15,000 francs and were accomplished by Picot, embroiderer to the Emperor and the Empress. One historian gave the details of Napoleon’s mantle, stating:

 

“The Imperial mantle of purple velvet powdered with golden bees; in the embroidery are interlaced branches of olive, laurel and oak surrounding the letter N. The lining, the border, and the tippet are of ermine. The mantle, open on the left side, allows the sword to be seen, which is sustained by a scarf of white satin embroidered and trimmed with a cord of gold; the long robe is of white satin embroidered with gold on all the seams, the hem of the robe embroidered with a cord of gold.”[4]

The Empress was also resplendent and likewise had a mantle of purple velvet powdered with golden bees, as did the French princes. Pages wore green coats with shoulder-knots of green silk embroidered with eagles at each end and powdered with bees. Moreover, golden bees also appeared on the square purple velvet cushion that held Charlemagne’s crown. (To see the only known embroidered bee that survives, click here).

 

Despite the importance of bees to Napoleon, he never gave an Order in Council or officially announced the adoption of it. He also never gave a formal explanation for why he chose the bee. He did, however, make sure that the bee was an important symbol at his imperial court after he was crowned. Bees could be found embellishing clothing and fabric and were incorporated into ceramics, furniture, glass, and metalwork. One historian also reported:

 

“He [Napoleon] sprinkled bees liberally on his ensign as General-in-Chief, he introduced them on the borders of the Army colours, he adorned the upper portion of the escutcheons of the Grand Dignitaries and good towns with them, he powdered them over his own carpets and hangings.”[5]

The bee was so important to Napoleon, it was exclusively reserved for the imperial family, and not even dukes could use it. However, on 19 May 1802, Napoleon established a reward for civil and military merit called the Légion d’Honneur and to indicate the importance of the bee, he used a version in the medal. This was, and is, France’s highest honor, and although there were critics who thought of it as a bauble, Napoleon knew its value, stating, “It is with baubles that men are led.”[6]

 

After the Treaty of Fontainebleau and his exile to Elba, he designed his own flag for Elba and once again used the bee that he so cherished. Perhaps, he did so because it linked him to the imperial mantle. The flag that floated over the island had a white background with a diagonal red stripe and three golden bees in the stripe. Gloria Peria, director of the Historical Archives of the Communes of the Island of Elba, notes:

 

“Having chosen to give the Island of Elba three bees meant giving the island a sense of unity under his reign, even though from an administrative point of view it was divided into several Municipalities … Napoleon’s flag of Elba was immediately a great success, so much so that, according to Pons de l’Herault in his Souvenirs et Anecdotes de l’Ile d’Elbe, even the Barbaresque pirates greeted it, because they saw in it the symbol of their war hero, Napoleon, in person, as they sailed the Tyrrhenian Sea.”[7]

 

When Louis XVIII came to power in 1815, he methodically replaced or destroyed Napoleon’s bee with the fleur-de-lys. Ultimately, few bees from Napoleon’s reign survived Louis’ eradication. The bee seemed to all but disappear until Napoleon’s remains were returned in 1840. One newspaper reported that the car carrying Napoleon’s body was “truly magnificent,” and that on the pedestal, “on both sides hung two velvet imperial mantles, sprinkled with bees.”[8]

 

*Although Chifflet thought what he discovered was bees, some scholars have suggested they were cicadas, a symbol that meant both death and resurrection to the Merovingians. However, other scholars believe they were flies because flies were found on the coats of arms of families from the territories of Venice and Flanders that were once controlled by the Merovingians. If they were flies, Napoleon’s enemies would have likely got a chuckle thinking he was covered with flies rather than bees.

 

References:

[1] W. H. Ireland, The Napoleon anecdotes, ed. by W.H. Ireland (London: C.S. Arnold, 1822), p. 18.

[2] F. Masson, Napoleon and His Coronation, (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1907), p. 97.

[3] Ibid., p. 98–99.

[4] Ibid, p. 314.

[5] Ibid., p. 99.

[6] B. Farwell, The Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-century Land Warfare: An Illustrated World View (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001), p. 488.

[7] “History of the flag of the Island of Elba,” Info Elba, accessed November 16, 2018, www.infoelba.com/discovering-elba/curious-facts/the-flag-...

[8] Downpatrick Recorder, “Funeral of Napoleon,” December 26, 1840, p. 1.

+++ 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.

 

+++ 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.

 

WESTCHESTER - Transients escape as fire consumes vacant auto dealership.

 

At 2:27 am the Los Angeles Fire department and the Los Angeles County Fire Department were called to 5208 West Centinela Avenue. Arriving fire companies were met with thick black smoke and flames billowing from a two story commercial structure. Three squatters were immediately spotted and rescued from the roof of the burning structure. After descending the fire department ladders the unidentified civilians fled the scene.

 

166 Firefighters under the command of Assistant Chief Ralph Terrazas battled this intense and stubborn fire. A partial roof collapse trapping flames beneath heavy debris made containment extremely challenging. A methodical and systematic approach completely extinguished the fire in three hours. © Photo by Steve Gentry.

 

LAFD.ORG | Blog | Facebook | Twitter @LAFD @LAFDtalk

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/200 and Focal Length of 55.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:26 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.2, Shutter speed of 1/400 and Focal Length of 28.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 17:03 EST PM

Saturday, February 11, 2012.Recap: No. 15 C'Town 87, No. 19 WC 69.By Brendan Hall..CHARLESTOWN, Mass. -- At this time last year, Charlestown made the trek West, down Route 146, to deliver a haymaker to a Whitinsville Christian squad considered the state's tallest lineup. ..This afternoon, the Crusaders came East to Bunker Hill, with a different look for the Townies -- smaller, quicker, more surgical -- and the result was very nearly a different outcome. The Crusaders hung with Charlestown through three quarters, before the Townies pulled away in the fourth, outscoring Whitinsville 31-14 in the final frame en route to an 87-69 victory. .."That team's very good, I thought that was the best shooting team we saw," Charlestown head coach Edson Cardoso said. "They're very well balanced, with a real good point guard, big man, two-guard, so I knew coming into this game it was going to be a battle. I told the guys, 'You're going to see a team like this in the state tournament, eventually down the line." ..The Townies (14-3), played just seven due to health (Jawhari Dawan-Abdullah, stomach bug) and off the court issues (Gary Braham, suspension). But they saw all five of their regular starters reach double-figures, with senior point guard Rony Fernandez (26 points, four assists) leading the way. Senior forward Tyrik Jackson (12 points, 13 rebounds) came up big on the glass again, while Tyrese Hoxter (16 points, seven assists), Omar Orriols (13 points) and Iser Barnes (12) contributed some big shots from the perimeter to keep the defense stretched out. ..But early on, the Crusaders (12-2) gave them fits with the methodical way they broke through the Townie's 2-3 zone with some of the most disciplined and precise ball movement they'd seen in a while. Junior point guard Colin Richey (23 points) funneled the offense down to the baseline, finding a player planted right in the heart of the zone and kicking to either the baseline or either wing. ..Whitinsville shot nearly 40 percent from the field, getting good looks from the short side from Tyler VandenAkker (12 points, eight rebounds) and Jesse Dykstra. Grant Brown (10 points) came up with some big shots from the perimeter as well. .."We decided to extend a little bit more on the short corner, because they hit about four shots in a row from the short corner," Cardoso said. "We also decided to have the opposite guard extend even more on shooter No. 2 (Tim Dufficey). So we made some extensions in the second half, did a little better job -- not a great job, but it helped us get the victory." ..To start the fourth quarter, Barnes completed a 6-0 run by ripping the ball out of his defender's hands at midcourt and landing a breakaway layup. A few possessions later, Hoxter found Jackson underneath the rim for an easy tip-in and 68-59 advantage. ..Then with 1:37 to go, sophomore Taris Wilson hit the first of two monster breakaway slams, this one making it 76-63 to essentially put the game in hand. ..Hot from the field: The Townies outrebounded the Crusaders 16-7 in the final frame, giving way to many key transition points that helped ice the lead and the win. From the glass, WC still held a slim 35-33 advantage. ..But down at the other end, the Townies had a terrific night from the field, shooting nearly 58 percent overall. That was aided by a 7-for-17 effort from three-point range, including three 3's each from Fernandez and Orriols. ..Praise for Richey: Last season, New Mission head coach Cory McCarthy was throwing around high praise for the then-sophomore Richey, calling him "a suburban kid that plays urban". ..Consider Cardoso another Boston City League coach that's a fan. .."He's tough," Cardoso said. "He's one of the toughest guards coming out of his league, and I think he's going give a lot of teams problems in the state tournament, because how do you stop a kid like that?" ..Turning point? Following last season's loss to Charlestown in its home gym, WC coach Jeff Bajema greeted his players in the locker room and told them, "Guys, we can win states." ..Sure enough, the Crusaders never lost another game the rest of the way, picking up their first Division 3 state title since 2005 at the DCU Center in Worcester. After that game, Bajema spoke to reporters about how much the whitewashing by Charlestown seasoned them for what to expect in the state tournament. ..Given how much more competitive the Crusaders were this time around, could this be seen as another momentum shift? .."Hopefully, a game like this will lead us to better things," Bajema said. "But we've got a tough one Tuesday (against Holy Name), so we'll see."

 

Shot at ISO 1600, Aperture of 3.5, Shutter speed of 1/250 and Focal Length of 30.0 mm

Taken with a 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM lens and processed by Aperture 3.2.2 on Saturday February-11-2012 16:34 EST PM

Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) was a French botanist. He was born to a well-to-do family in Aix-en-Provence. Tournefort initially took up studies in theology. However, as he had a marked inclination towards natural sciences, he turned to medicine. He completed his studies at the University of Montpellier. In 1681, he was in Barcelona doing research in botany. In 1694 Tournefort published his first three-volume work, in which he classified 8846 plants. In 1698 he became Doctor in Medicine of the University of Paris. At that time his treatise was also translated into Latin. Tournefort became a famous physician and naturalist. He travelled extensively in Western Europe (Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, England). He had published a number of works on botany, and had acquired a fabulous collection of nearly 50.000 books, as well as costumes, arms, minerals, shells and various curiosities. Thus, he already had a very important career behind him when Louis XIV entrusted him with the mission to bring new plants to the Royal Botanical Garden.

 

Tournefort started out on his voyage to the Near East in the spring of 1700, at the age of 44, accompanied by a painter and a doctor. He visited thirty-eight islands of the Greek archipelago, as well as Northern Anatolia, Pontus and Armenia, and reached Tiflis in Georgia. Tournefort returned to Marseilles in June 1702.

 

His manuscript, composed of his letters to the Minister of the Exterior Count de Pontchartain, was published posthumously in 1717. A number of re-editions followed, while his work was also translated into English, German and Flemish. There is also a Greek translation of the first part. The fact that Tournefort had discovered new plants in his journey led him to publish a supplement to his main work of botanical classification in 1703. He taught Botany in the Académie, while continuing to practice medicine; at the same time, he was in charge of the Royal Gardens, where many plants he brought from his travels were cultivated with success. Having survived a multitude of adventures, Tournefort died of an accident in 1708. He did not live to see the publication of his travel chronicle, which in the following three centuries became the basic manual to all travellers to these regions. Until today, researchers from numerous fields turn to Tournefort’s text, as it remains an invaluable source of information. He describes the places he visited in a particular systematic manner.

 

The systematic way he organizes his information on topography, economy, administration, ethnic composition, customs and habits of everyday life shows how one can arrive at truth and knowledge through research, methodical study, classification and generalisation. To document his research, Tournefort cites a hundred and thirty-five texts by Greek and Latin authors as well as Byzantine writers, Humanists, and earlier travel accounts.

 

He methodically narrates his visit to each island, and describes the locations as well as events that he witnessed and encounters with locals. He then continues with the island’s history from ancient times to the current age, citing the corresponding myths, and comparing with the information provided by ancient coins. Subsequently, he writes on the island’s administration and taxes, commerce, products and prices thereof. An entire chapter is dedicated to the Greek church. Tournefort also writes on monasteries and churches, house architecture and caves. He also describes the customs, the dress and the occupations of the inhabitants. He concludes his chapters with geographical observations from the highest point of each main region.

 

Naturally, his work includes engravings of city views, locations and monuments as well as plants, instruments and costumes. The text becomes alive with vivid descriptions of his encounters with islanders, be it Turks, Franks, Greeks or privateers. Of special interest are his descriptions of fortresses, ports, safe havens and his information on map drawing.

 

The second volume is a publication of his thoroughly documented manuscripts. It was not edited by Tournefort himself as had happened with the first. On numerous occasions he refers to the politics, administration and ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire. He continues with his journey on the southern coast of the Black Sea to Armenia. The work closes with a short description of Smyrna and Ephesus.

 

Tournefort is considered the first to have shown the islands of the Archipelago to be “travel material”, as he offered information which inspired the interest for further research, and also highlighed each location’s wealth and uniqueness.

 

Written by Ioli Vingopoulou

  

Fransız botanikçi Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) Aix-en-Provence'da varlıklı bir aile içinde doğar, ilk önce tanrıbilim (teoloji) dersleri izler ancak genç yaştan beri doğa bilimlerine eğilim gösterir. Bu yüzden Montpellier'de tıp öğrenimi görüp 1681'de botanik araştırmaları yapmak üzere Barcelona'ya gelir. 1694 yılında üç ciltlik ve 8.846 bitkinin sınıflandırmasına ilişkin ilk eserini yayınlar; 1698'de Paris Tıp Fakültesinden doktor unvanını alır ve bu kazanımı yapıtının latince çevirisi izler. Doktor ve doğa bilimcisi olarak ün salmış, Batı Avrupa'da (İspanya, Portekiz, Hollanda, İngiltere'ye) seyahat etmiş, botanoloji ile ilgili kitaplar yayınlamış, 50.000'e yakın kitaptan meydana gelen bir kitaplık oluşturmuş, ayrıca yerel kıyafet, silah, mineral, deniz kabuğu ve daha başka ilginç şeylerden oluşan hayranlık uyandıran koleksiyonlar sahibi olmuşken, kral 14. Louis ona Kraliyet Botanik Bahçesine yeni bitkiler getirme görevini verir. Tournefort 1700 yılının ilkbaharında, 44 yaşındayken, yanına yoldaş olarak bir ressam ve bir doktor alarak Yakın Doğu'ya doğru yola çıkar.

 

Ege adalarından 38 tanesini ziyaret eder, Kuzey Anadolu'nun her tarafını gezip Karadeniz ve Ermenistan yörelerine gelir, Tiflis'e varır. Tournefort, 1702 yılının Haziran ayında Marsilya'da karaya ayak basar.

 

Kaleme aldığı metin (Dışişleri bakanı Kont de Pontchartain'e yolladığı mektuplar biçiminde) ilk olarak 1717'de yayınlanır, bu ilk yayını bir çok yeni baskı izler ve eser ingilizce, almanca ve flamanca gibi dillere- ilk kısmı yunancaya da - çevrilir. Yeni keşfettiği bitkilerin daha önce belirlemiş olduğu sınıflandırma sistemine eklenmesi sonucu olarak 1703'te yeni bir cilt yayınlar. Tournefort botanik profesörü sıfatıyla Akademide dersler verir, doktorluk mesleğini ve bunlara koşut olarak Kraliyet Bahçesinin sorumluluğu görevini sürdürür. Gezilerinden getirmiş olduğu birçok yeni bitki bu bahçede başarılı bir şekilde yetiştirilir. Tournefort geçirdiği birçok maceradan kefeni yırtmışken, üç asır boyunca her gezginin bu bölge için başucu kitabı olacak seyahatnamesinin yayınlanmasını göremeden 1708'de bir kaza sonucu ölür. Bugün hâlâ çeşitli dallardan araştırmacılar Tournefort'un metnine başvurup son derece değerli bilgilerinden faydalanmak durumundalar. Eseri anında ingilizce, hollandaca ve almancaya çevrilmişti.

 

Gezdiği yerleri betimlerken belirli bir yöntem izleyerek topoğrafya, ekonomi, yönetim, milletler sentezi ve günlük yaşamdaki örf ve adetlere ilişkin bilgiler verirken, Tournefort, bilginin gerçeğe uyup uymadığı konusuna araştırma, düzenli okuma, sınıflandırma ve genelleştirme yoluyla yanaşılabileceğini kanıtlıyor. Kanıtlayıcı belgeleri arasında antik Yunan ve Latin yazarlarından, ayrıca Bizans yazarlarından ve daha eski hümanist bilgin ve gezginlerden 135 tane metin bulunmakta.

 

Ziyaret ettiği her ada için düzenli olarak ziyaretini anlatıp birçok yeri ve olayı hatta yerlilerle olan görüşmelerini de betimler. Bunlara ek olarak, adanın eski çağlardan gününe dek tarihi ve bununla ilintili efsaneler, sikkeler hakkında, yönetim, vergilendirme usulleri, ticaret, ürünler ve fiyatları hakkında bilgiler verir. Ayrıca Yunanistan'ın dinî (kilise) yaşamına başlıbaşına bir bölüm ayırır. Manastırlar, kiliseler, evlerin mimarisi, mağaralar hakkında yazar, adetler ve kıyafetleri betimleyip halkın uğraşlarından sözeder ve önemli yörelerin her birinin en yüksek irtifasından yaptığı coğrafya gözlemleri ile anlatımını bitirir.

 

Doğal olarak eserinde şehir, yer, anıt, bitki, alet, ve kıyafet görünümleri ile ilgili gravürler de yer almakta. Ayrıca metni ada halkıyla (Türkler, Latinler, Yunanlılar, korsanlarla) ilişkilerinden çarpıcı betimlemelerle de çeşitlenir. Kitabında hisarlar, gemi barınakları, güvenli limanlar hakkında yaptığı betimlemeler ve harita çizimi ile ilgili verdiği bilgiler özel ilgi uyandıran kısımlar arasındadır.

 

Eserinin birinci cildinin yayına hazırlığını kendisi denetlemişken ikinci cilt kendi ayrıntılı yazılarına sadık kalınarak basılır. Bu cildin başındaki birçok bölüm Osmanlıların siyasal, yönetimsel ve etnografik durumuna ayrılmıştır. Bunun devamında Karadeniz'in güney kıyılarında yaptığı Ermenistan'a kadar varan yolculuğunu anlatıp kitabı İzmir ve Efes'in kısa bir betimlemesi ile bitirir.

 

Böylece Tournefort, başkalarında arayış isteğini besleyecek nitelikte malzeme sağlamanın yanısıra, gördüğü her yerin sonsuz zengiliğini ve kendine özgü niteliklerini yüzeye çıkarması açısından Ege adalarına bir "yolculuk uknumu" veren ilk şahıs olarak bilinir.

 

Yazan: İoli Vingopoulou

 

Pen drawing done with the posted road cut photo as the jump off point. This kind of exploration puts me in touch with the visual ideas that intrigued me and helps me to feel it.

I set up a rhythm of line and avoid a methodical approach. I let the pen move constantly, relying on split second decisions. The photo started it, but I watch the drawing after that, and refer to the photo only briefly after that. It's fun.

 

1 2 ••• 43 44 46 48 49 ••• 79 80