View allAll Photos Tagged plating
I was very impressed by the Atera crew - the restaurant employs 30 people to serve two groups of guests per night, 14 seats at a time.
The cab floor plating brings the dodge floor level and covers all the unused holes the standard floor. The new plating was installed with pool welds and seam weld. It is all solid and should serve us well.
Grant Achatz plating dessert.
alinea
Chicago, Illinois
(March 23, 2013)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | Bonjwing Photography
The nickel and chrome electroplating company is actually located at 2020 N. Holly Ave., accessible from a driveway into the Best Buy parking lot off of W. Armitage Avenue. It also does small-lot production plating on various metals.
Peeps Sushi arranged on the plate, for all to enjoy. (Except the Peep-rights commission who have called us "murderers" and "the worst sort of peep-les.")
John Shields.
Saison (John Shields Guest Chef Dinner)
San Francisco, California
(October 12, 2013)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | Bonjwing Photography
What is Food Plating? Food plating is the process of arranging and decorating food to enhance its presentation. Improving the presentation of a dish adds value to the dining experience, and provides room for a higher mark-up on your food. (7.30.23 Sharing the Knowledge}
Veal Cheeks
Thai vinaigrette, green curry butter.
Synergy Series #5: Grant Achatz
Spoon & Stable
Minneapolis, Minnesota
(April 13, 2017)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Bonjwing Photography
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In early 1968, the Soviet Ministry of Defense decided to develop a specialized shturmovik armored assault aircraft in order to provide close air support for the Soviet Ground Forces. The idea of creating a ground-support aircraft came about after analyzing the experience of shturmovaya (ground attack) aviation during World War II, and in local wars during the 1950s and 1960s. The Soviet fighter-bombers in service or under development at this time (Su-7, Su-17, MiG-21 and MiG-23) did not meet the requirements for close air support of the army. They lacked essential armor plating to protect the pilot and vital equipment from ground fire and missile hits, and their high flight speeds made it difficult for the pilot to maintain visual contact with a target. Ordnance load and loiter time were also insufficient.
In March 1969, a competition was announced by the Soviet Air Force that called for designs for a new battlefield close-support aircraft. Participants in the competition were the Design Bureaus of Sukhoi, Yakovlev, Ilyushin and Mikoyan. The original request was for a simple, relavtively light aircraft, that was easy to produce and maintain and would allow a high survivabilty in a combat environment.
The aircraft was to be powered by two Ivchenko AI-25T non-afterburning turbofans, each with a thrust of 1.750 kgp (3.860 lbst) - a modification of the AI-25 developed for the Yak-40 feederliner, and the same engine that powered the Czech-built L-39 Albatros trainer. The aircraft was to carry an internal cannon and was only intended to carry unguided weapons - bombs of up to 500 kg caliber and rockets/rocket pods.Sighting was to be simple, consisting of a collimating gunsight and a laser rangefinder.
Normal combat payload was to be 1.500 kg (3.310 lb), increasing to 2.500 kg (5.511 lb) in overload configuration. Normal TOW would be 8.200 kg (18.080 lb) and MTOW in the 10.000 kg (22.050 lb) range
All OKBs made submissions, but in the course of the proposals the requirements were widened, eventually necessitating a bigger, more capable aircraft. This eventually led to the Ilyushin’s Il-42 (later renamed into Il-102) and Sukhoi’s T-8 (the later Su-25), which remained in the official competition and the Su-25 would, aftre a long development phase, turn out to be the winner.
OKB Yakovlev had been late with its submission, which was still based on the original requirement. it was clear that their aircraft, internally known as the Yak-35, would neither meet the more demanding profile, nor offer the development potential for a heavier type. Anyway, OKB Yakovlev kept the development going, as a lot of export potential was expected.
Until May 1970 a total of three prototypes were built and successfully tested. The Yak-35 was a compact aircraft with clean lines, and it took the experience from the recently built (but rejected) Yak-30/32 trainer (NATO code "Magnum/Mantis") further. The modern design featured shoulder-mounted, slightly swept wings and a swept cruciform tail. The AI-25T engines were buried side by side in the rear fuselage, fed by lateral air intakes. The pilot sat in an armored cockpit that would withstand 0.5" caliber fire, and the slanted nose offered good for- and downward view. The aircraft reminded vaguely of the Saab 105 trainer or Sukhoi's initial, light T-8 design.
The rugged landing gear with single low pressure tires retracted into the fuselage. Armement compriseda pair of 30mm Nudelman-Richter NR-30 cannons with 100RPG, mounted under the air intakes, and a total of seven hardpoints (three under each wing, one under the fuselage) for ordnance. The inner pair of pylons was "wet" and could carry PTB-600 drop tanks, the fuselage hardpoint was intended for extre equipment like a reconnaissance pod, an ECM jammer or (in later versions, see below) guidance pods for air to ground missiles. For self-defence, IR-guided missiles like the R-3S, R-13M and later the R-60 could be carried on the outer pylons.
Avionics included a passive SPO-10 Sirena 3M RHAWS, coupled with a set of KDS-23 chaff/flare dispensers at the rear base of the fin, and an active SPS-141 Siren jammer. A Fon laser rangefinder was fitted into the nose tip, coupled with an S-17VG-1sighting mechanism, a DISS-7 doppler speed and drift measurement unit and a PKB-3 sight for toss bombing, an ASP-17B gunsight, an RV-5R radar altimeter and a V-144 computer.
Western officials first became aware of the new type during the October Parade 1972 in Moscow, when the three initial Yak-35 made a single pass at medium altitude. The unknown type immediately received the NATO code "Fraudster". The prototypes and two static airframes continued the development program at slow pace - no serious problem occured, and the Yak-35 turned out to be a stable and agile weapon platform, receiving positive praise from the test pilots.
As time went by, things turned into favor of the the Yak-35, which eventually got its chance: As the shturmovaya program around the Su-25 ran into more and more delay, and a new attack aircraft was direly needed - not long ago, tensions with China concerning the disputed Damanskiy and Kirkinskiy Islands on the Ussuri River had caused much alert. Finally, the Yak-35 was ordered into production, while parts of its fuselage design had already been used for the Yak-38 VTOL aircraft for the Soviet Navy.
From 1974 on the Yak-35 was delivered to front line squadrons, in parallel with the VG Su-17 fighter bomber. The service aircraft were updated with Delta-N radio guidance equipment, placed in a fairing in front of the fin, which would allow the Yak-35D ('dorabotanyy' = Updated; NATO code "Fraudster B") to carry radio-guided AGMs like the Kh23 or Kh-25 missiles. The emitter had to be carried in an external pod, though, normally placed under the fuselage. A pair of these missiles could be carried on launch rails on the inner pair of pylons.
A total of 110 Yak-35Ds were built until 1979, all of them remained in Soviet Air Force Service, and almost exclusively in transbaikalian units. None of them were deployed to Afghanistan, as the rather weak engine powered was deemed unsatisfactory for the 'hot and high' conflict theatre.
From 1982 on the Yak-35Ds were quickly replaced by the then-finally-ready Su-25 and relegated into second line services. Most of the remaining Yak-35Ds were kept in use for weapon training, mostly at flight academies along MiG-21 fighters until 1990, and some served as target tugs with frontline units in the Far East. No specimen was ever exported.
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length incl. pitot: 14.54 m (47 ft 7 3/4 in) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 9,52 m (31 ft 2½ in)
Height: 4.6 m (15 ft ½ in)
Empty weight: 6.525 kg (14.375 lb)
Loaded weight: 8.750 kg (19.275 lb)
Max. take-off weight: 11.400 kg (25.110 lb)
Powerplant:
2× Ivchenko AI-25T non-afterburning turbofans, each with a thrust of 1.750 kgp (3.860 lbst)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1.050 km/h (652 mph/Mach 0.9) at height, clean configuration; 825 km/h (512 mph) with external stores at sea level
Range: 1.450 km (900 mi); high, clean configuration
Ferry range: 2.500 km (1,553 mi)
Service ceiling: 14.000 m (45.850 ft)
Rate of climb: 76 m/s (14.936 ft/min)
Thrust/weight: 0.54
Armament:
2× NR-30 30mm cannons with 100 RPG
7 hardpoints for up to 2.500 kg (5.511 lb) of external ordnance, including rails for 2× IR-guided air-to-air missiles for and a wide variety of general-purpose bombs, cluster bombs, gun pods, rocket pods, drop tanks and radio-guided air-to-surface missiles like the Kh-23 or Kh-25.
The kit and its assembly:
This fantasy thing was spawned by the vague thought that one could turn the rather crude Yak-38 kit from Tsukuda Hobby into "something pretty". The plan had been lingering for some time, and when I got hands on an incomplete Yak-38 (Revell re-boxing of the kit, canopy missing) I eventually started with the surgery, letting inspiration and donation parts flow.
I had a vague idea of what the aircraft should look like, but the overall layout evolved step by step. One initial measure was to shorten the fuselage considerably: plugs from in front of and behind the original wings were cut out, and the remaining three fuselage pieces glued together. As the fuselage has an almost even diameter and shape all along its length, this turned out to be pretty easy, but still needed considerably putty work.
The original fittings for the wings and tail surfaces were then filled with styrene plugs and sanded even.
Moving the wings from their original mid-position to the shoulders was already something I had in mind before the project started. But the eventual solution just evolved as I had the fuselage ready and could judge positions and proportions.
The wings I used come from a Alpha Jet (Heller), and they were not simply stuck to the fuselage. Due to the curved back of the Yak-38 I had to add a kind of console, made from the upper wing's mid section of a Matchbox SBC Helldiver biplane (!). This connector piece was placed into a carved fairing on top of the fuselage, the new wings attached to it, and the missing bodywork sculpted with 2C putty. This way I was able to blend the new arrangement into the rest of the body with matching wing roots, without having it look as if the wings had simple been stuck onto it. The result is pretty good, looks rather organic.
The tail is new, too. Original plan had been to use the Yak-38 tail, maybe with a T-tail arrangement - but that simply did not look good. Finding a replacement was tough, I finally settled on an A-4M (Italeri) fin, which had to be modified with a clipped top, Yak-38 style, in order NOT to remind too much of the Douglas creation! It fits in shape and size, though.
New stabilizers had to be used, too - the original Yak-38 looked much too small and flimsy. A T-tail was not possible anymore, so I used a cruciform tail, A-4 style, even though the stabilizers had to be moved upwards since the Yak-38 tail is much wider than an A-4. The stabilizers themselves are new, too: a pair of F-86 fins(!), leftover from Hobby Boss kits. They are a bit thick, but look great and blend well into the whole arrangement.
The main landing gear was taken OOB, but with new wheels and extra struts fitted. The front wheel is totally new, it belongs to a Fiat G-91. The cockpit received a new seat (from a MiG-29), a pilot figure and a primitive dashboard, and a donation canopy had to be found and integrated (I think it comes from a Tamiya 1:100 F-105).
All around the hull small details were added, including the seven pylons and the rocket pod ordnance.
Painting and markings:
It took a while and some research to turn up a suitable, tactical paint scheme. Normally I keep whifs rather subtle, and I did not want to paint the Yak-35 in a dark green/brown scheme, typical for Eastern Europe aircraft.
Afghanistan was a vague idea, a desert/mountainous scheme, as well as the Su-25 prototype which appreared at Le Bourget ("301 Blue"), with its two-tone brown livery and a few green accents.
I finally found a Su-7UM trainer in a light, three-tone camouflage which I transplanted on my Yak-35. It consists of two sand tones (Humbrol 187 and 63) and a green tone (Humbrol 155). Looks rather surreal! The undersides are kept in Russian Blue (Humbrol 115).
Since much of the fuselage consists of pure putty and re-engraving would be rather hazardous I painted panel lines, with a mix of sepia ink and acrylic matt varnish. A second-best solution, but the result is O.K., when you do not take a closer look...
The whole thing received a light wash with black ink in order to emphasize panel line and details and the leading edges were lightly dry-brushed with pale grey. Basic colors were also ‘tamed down’ trough dry painting with shades of light beige and grey, for a worn and bleached look.
Cockpit interior was painted in typical, Soviet "anti fatigue" turquoise, the landing gear was painted in a mix of Aluminum and Olive Drab. Di-electric panels were painted in a bright green, a mix of Humbrol 2 and 175.
Most markings come from the scrap box, insignia and tactical code come from a Carpena Decals 1:72 MiG17 aftermarket sheet.
This thing was a major surgical act, but turned out nicely. With an arrestor hook this could also have become a maritime fighter bomber, e. g. an alternative to the French Dassault Ètendard or the Jaguar M? It looks familiar, has some serious Su-25 appeal, yet the thing looks unique. And the desert/mountain style paint scheme suits the aircraft well.
One of the newer menu items at Tofte's Table in Waukesha, WI.
Photography by mike batZler
Milwaukee, WI, USA
@mbatzler
This Custom Shop Stratocaster was gold plated for a professional musician's collection. This photo was published in a BBC News item (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8334329.stm) and other photos published in guitar magazines.
Factory worker plating metal parts. The jug on the work bench is Consolidated Equipment Inc. Electroplating Solution, Poison. The photo was taken in 1950, I scanned it from a 4X5 negative.
lunch: burrata, tomato, basil, anchovy, balsamic.
For more, check out CONSUMED(I,THIS), a food blog.
Poached pear (flavoured with star anise, bay leaf and cinnamon), under citrus/vanilla bean sauce. With Chocolate tuile at the side. Raspberry coulis, chocolate mousse quenelles, topped with milk chocolate/hazelnut waffer crumble. At the corner is a fruit salad of strawberry and mango with a chocolate butterfly tuile.
This portable bench is placed near the plating bench to hold a number items including finished parts from the day before.
The gray tube in the upper left is a plating dummy that is plated in the first run of the day to purify the solution. The hair dryer is used to blow dry the freshly finished parts at a medium heat.
The respirator has chemical cartridges and is worn anytime I'm working with the chemicals. I also wear eye protection and a full length lab apron. Other items include paper, pencil, calculator, copper wire for stringing parts together and paper shop towels.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In early 1968, the Soviet Ministry of Defense decided to develop a specialized shturmovik armored assault aircraft in order to provide close air support for the Soviet Ground Forces. The idea of creating a ground-support aircraft came about after analyzing the experience of shturmovaya (ground attack) aviation during World War II, and in local wars during the 1950s and 1960s. The Soviet fighter-bombers in service or under development at this time (Su-7, Su-17, MiG-21 and MiG-23) did not meet the requirements for close air support of the army. They lacked essential armor plating to protect the pilot and vital equipment from ground fire and missile hits, and their high flight speeds made it difficult for the pilot to maintain visual contact with a target. Ordnance load and loiter time were also insufficient.
In March 1969, a competition was announced by the Soviet Air Force that called for designs for a new battlefield close-support aircraft. Participants in the competition were the Design Bureaus of Sukhoi, Yakovlev, Ilyushin and Mikoyan.
Mikoyan OKB proposed two directions: First option were designs which were based upon proven technology of the MiG-21 and -23, with an eye on short development time – e. g. the LSSh and 27Sh concepts. The other approach was a more experimental type, designed from scratch, but this concept focused more radically on survivability and excellent low altitude agility, at the expense of speed and a short development time.
All MiG OKB designs were eventually rejected by the MoD, and effectively only Ilyushin’s Il-42 (later renamed into Il-102) and Sukhoi’s T-8 (the later Su-25) remained in the official competition. But Mikoyan’s second design showed potential and was considered as a basis for an advanced jet trainer. This aircraft was approved to be developed further, but not with high priority and outside of the official shturmovik competition. Anyway, it was a fallback option, should both main contenders fail.
The project received the internal development code ‘Izdeliye 1.43’, but the forthcoming aircraft was better known under its project handle MiG-SPB (Samolet Polya Boya – ‘armored combat aircraft’) or its nickname, ла́сточка (Lastochka = Swallow). Some sources claim that the type was also designated MiG-43, but it never received an official code, despite its front line test service (see below).
The MiG-SPB’s main design objective was superior maneuverability at low speeds and altitude. It offered the pilot excellent view and a high resilience to frontline combat situations. The aircraft’s most prominent trademark was its engine location: in overall layout, the MiG-SPB resembled Sukhoi’s T-8, with straight wings and two jet engines placed in nacelles at the fuselage flanks. But in order to protect the engines from gunfire and shield the hot exhaust gases from view (e .g. from IR seeker heads, esp. from MANPADS), the nacelles were placed above the mid-set wings, with the air intakes at wing leading edge level.
Despite carrying armor around the cockpit and the central fuselage, the aircraft was surprisingly slender and elegant – so slim that the rigid landing gear, which would allow operation from field air strips, retracted into fairings which also housed the internal gun on starboard and avionics on port. As a side benefit of this complex layout, the CoG was kept very centralized, so that agility was further improved. The tail was conventional, even though the vertical stabilizer was rather high and slender.
For its low altitude duties, a large wing area, high wing aspect ratio, and large ailerons were incorporated. The high aspect ratio wing also allowed for short takeoffs and landings, permitting operations from primitive forward airfields near front lines. It was planned that the type would typically fly at a relatively slow speed of 300 knots (350 mph; 560 km/h), loiter for extended periods and operate under 1.000 ft (300 m) ceiling with 1.5 mi (2.4 km) visibility. This would have made it a much better platform for the ground-attack role than contemporary fast fighter-bombers, which often gave difficulty targeting small and slow-moving targets, or finding them again for a second attack.
Originally, the MiG-SPB was powered by two Ivchenko AI-25 turbofan with 14.7 kN (3,300 lbf) each, basically the same engine that drove the Yak-40 regional jet airliner. In early 1981 these were replaced by two much more powerful Klimov RD-33M turbofans: non-afterburning versions of the engines that powered the Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter (under development at MiG OKB at that time) and which were also introduced in the production Su-25.
Armament comprised a fixed gun in the starboard fairing and 3.500kg (7.700 lb.) of external ordnance, carried on eight wing hardpoints plus a centerline pylon under the fuselage.
Originally, a two-barreled Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L 23 mm cannon with 350 rounds was fitted, but that soon gave way to a more powerful 30mm GSh-30-1 cannon which could fire armor-piercing shells at 1.800 rpm. The gun's maximum effective range was 1.200 to 1.800 m (3.900 to 5.900 ft.) and, in combination with the Klen-PS laser rangefinder/targeting system in the aircraft’s nose, it was extremely accurate as well as powerful, capable of destroying a target with as few as three to five rounds.
At least one pre-production aircraft was even fitted with a single-barreled 45mm cannon.
Further avionics included a DISS-7 Doppler navigation radar, coupled with a navigation system that permitted flight in day and night conditions, both in VMC and IMC (even though the aircraft did not feature an all-weather/attack capability), and providing flight data for the weapons-control system and flight instruments. Radios for air-to-ground and air-to-air communications were fitted, as well as a weapons-control system and a full self-defense suite, incorporating infra-red, flare and chaff dispensers capable of launching about 250 flares and dipole chaff. An SRO radar warning receiver that would alert the pilot of incoming attacks on the aircraft, as well as an SPO-15 radar homing & warning system (RHAWS) and an SO-69 identification-friend-or-foe (IFF) transponder were incorporated.
With no official support the MiG-SPB’s development went on slowly, but due to several delays and specification changes in the official shturmovik competition it kept up pace and was more or less ready just in time for direct comparison. The MiG-SPB prototype first flew on 14 February 1978 and began State acceptance trials on 12 October 1979. Since the secondary use as a trainer was still on the agenda, all prototypes and pre-production machines were two-seaters, even though the plane was still primarily intended for the ground attack role and accordingly equipped.
An order for a first batch of twenty pre-production machines was placed in November 1979, and five of these had been completed by the spring of 1980 and were undergoing pre-flight tests when the Soviet MoD decided to try the type under real conditions. Together with an initial batch of Su-25s a total of five MiG-SPBs with support crews and maintenance equipment were sent to Afghanistan.
On 19 July 1981 and with the new RD-33M engines already fitted, these aircraft arrived at Shindand Airbase in western Afghanistan and were assigned to the 201st Independent Shturmovaya Air Squadron, flying together with the first Su-25 unit deployed to that country. Their main task was to conduct air strikes against mountain military positions and structures controlled by the Afghan rebels. The MiG-SPB proved to be easy to handle, esp. under “hot and high” conditions.
Flight characteristics were closely comparable to the Su-25 and the aircraft gained a good reputation among the flight crews. But field maintenance was more complicated and the electronic systems proved not to be as reliable and sturdy as the Su-25’s, though. Another drawback was the lower ordnance load of 3.500kg (the Su-25 could theoretically carry 4.500kg), which suffered further in the thin air of the Afghan summer. Usually, only 1.000 kg were carried, unguided missiles or iron bombs being the most frequent weapons.
The MiG-SPB found its niche, though: the second seat made the MiG-SPB a formidable reconnaissance and observation aircraft. The MiG-SPBs were frequently used as forward air control aircraft which would locate and mark targets, guide other fighter bombers to them and later control/assess the attack success (BDA missions).
In the late months of employment, the rear seat was also taken up by a weapon officer who would steer guided weapons, when several smart bombs and missiles as well as their respective sensor and guidance packages were tried out under field conditions.
Over the course of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, five more MiG-SPB were transferred to Afghanistan in order to keep a minimum of four machines active at all times. The aircraft performed a total of roundabout 2.500 combat sorties, ~250 per aircraft (less than the Su-25, which clocked 340 and more). Between the first deployment in 1981 and the end of the tests in April 1983, one aircraft was lost in combat operations, another one crashed in a landing accident. When NATO became aware of the type in late 1982, the MiG-SPB received the code name ‘Flintstone’.
In the end, the MiG-SPB had no future. After a long development process for the new shturmovik, the Su-25 surpassed its main competitor in the Soviet Air Force competition, the Ilyushin Il-102, as well as the MiG-SPB, and series production of Sukhoi’s type was announced by the Ministry of Defense. Since the trainer option did not show any future potential (meanwhile, the smaller and much less costly L-39 Albatros had been chosen as jet trainer), further development of the MiG-SPB was stopped – even though the experience with the type would later be incorporated into the MiG-AT trainer aircraft.
General characteristics (as flown)
Crew: Two (one pilot, one observer/WO)
Length: 15.19 m (50 ft 5½ in) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 14.79 m (49 ft 1½ in)
Height: 4.26 m (14 ft 2 in)
Wing area: 37.19 m² (400.3 ft²)
Empty weight: 9.890 kg (21.784 lb)
Loaded weight: 14.150 kg (31.186 lb)
Max. take-off weight: 17.200 kg (37.885 lb)
Powerplant:
2 × Klimov RD-33M turbofans, 44.18 kN (9,480 lbf) each
Performance:
Maximum speed: 890 km/h (553 mph)
Combat radius: 400 km (250 mi)
Ferry range: 2,500 km (1,553 mi)
Service ceiling: 7,500 m (25,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 58 m/s (11,400 ft/min)
Wing loading: 490 kg/m² (100 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.52
Armament:
1× GSh-30-1 30mm cannon with 300 rounds
9 hardpoints for up to 3.500 kg (7.700 lb) of disposable external ordnance, including rails for 2 × R-60 (AA-8 'Aphid') or other air-to-air missiles for self-defense and a wide variety of general-purpose bombs, cluster bombs, gun pods, rocket pods, laser- or TV-guided bombs, and air-to-surface missiles.
The centerline pylon was usually only used for sensor or reconnaissance pods.
The four inner wing hardpoints were ‘wet’ for 800l drop tanks.
The kit and its assembly:
I think it’s the first time that I convert a helicopter into an aircraft. But ESCI’s fictional Ka-34 ‘Hokum’ (probably only based on satellite pictures from above and vague sketches of the real thing, the Ka-50) is so sleek and aircraft-like – why not give it a try?
My idea behind this purely fictional whif was to build a contender to the Su-25 and its real introduction story, with the long development phase since the late 60ies, the competition with the Il-102 and the Afghanistan trials. Even the submissions of Mikoyan OKB are real (yet rejected…), but my SPB was an additional design outside of the “proven technology” sandbox.
So, the Ka-34 fuselage and the ground attack role were clear and defined further design elements.
Looking for suitable straight wings I came at first across Revell’s 1:100 SnapFit A-10 as a donation kit for the wings, but these turned out to be too small. When I rummaged for alternative parts I finally found an ancient (25 years? Its white polystyrene was thoroughly yellowed…), half-built Airfix A-1 – a horrible kit which now found its final and good use! So, effectively, my MiG-SPB is a kit-bashing of two kits with some extra donations.
The Ka-34’s fuselage was more modified than initially intended: the main rotor mount was faired over and the tail fin cut away, because it looked too small/slender/modern for the massive and straight A-1 wings.
I kept the Ka-34’s original nose, but flattened its top for a better field of view and added a window in the nose for a laser range finder with fixed glazing (much like the Su-25). Some antennae, an OoA sensor and pitots were added, too. Cockpit and landing gear were taken OOB, but I added new seats and pilot figures as well as bigger wheels (from an A-7).
Other external changes include bigger engine nacelles, from a Hobby Boss Me 262. They are mounted backwards, though, and their interior outfitted with new parts from the scrap box. I left them in their helicopter-like high position above the wings, but had to raise their position due to thick A-1 wings.
Ultimately, all tail stabilizers come from the A-1 kit, since they’d fit well in size and shape. The wings were modified in so far that I filled the A-1’s landing gear wells (covers were gone, used 2C putty) and tried to hide the folding wing lines. Weapon hardpoints come from A-7 and F-16 kits, the ordnance of two B-13L and two B-8M rocket pods comes from an ICM Soviet air-to-ground weapon sets – the choice reflects the FAC duty of the type in the hot-and-high Afghanistan environment, so only unguided rockets for target marking and against small, soft targets are carried, plus two R-60 for self-defense.
Painting and markings:
Normally I keep whifs rather subtle, but this time I gave the MiG-SPB a rather weird camouflage scheme. The MiG-SPB’s stylish three-tone clover pattern has actually been applied to Soviet Mi-24 helicopters, and a similar wrap-around scheme (in olive green, though) can be found on some Ukrainian Su-25. I found this scheme very attractive, and since it looks IMHO very Russian the MiG-SPB was a nice occasion to try it out – the colors even matching the dusty/mountainous Afghanistan theatre where the model would have been used, according to its fictional story.
Basic upper colors are Humbrol 168 and ‘clover leafs’ in 84 and 98 (Hemp, Mid-Stone and Chocolate, in these “levels” above each other), later ‘tamed down’ trough dry painting with shades of light beige and grey, for a worn and bleached look.
This pattern is utterly effective in order to break up contours: Even when the thing just sat on the work bench it was hard to tell where its front or rear end would be, or how the fuselage and wing intersection would look like in detail. And it even looks flashy…
Lower side was painted in Humbrol 65 – pretty bright, but such tones are typical for Soviet/Russian aircraft.
Additionally, the whole thing received a light wash with black ink in order to emphasize panel line and details and the leading edges were lightly dry-brushed with silver.
Most markings come from the scrap box, insignia, tactical code and some emblems like the MiG OKB badge come from an Authentic Decals 1:72 MiG-29 aftermarket sheet, most stencils from the vast X-20M missile decal sheet from ICM.
All in all a nice project which was based on a spontaneous idea. But it came out better than expected, concerning both the aircraft itself but also the weird cammo scheme, which will certainly pop up under other circumstances (mecha?)!
"Christmas Wreath"
Smoked turkey, fried onions.
(Takazawa)
Twelve Days of Christmas
Day 7: Yoshiaki Takazawa
The Restaurant at Meadowood
St. Helena, California
(December 16, 2017)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Bonjwing Photography
These earrings have been made from brightly shining gold and rose gold plating has also been provided.
Number 1 benefit of Chrome plating your motorcycle:
Motorcycle owners are familiar with the term chrome plating. This is a process of applying a thin layer of chromium onto metallic or plastic parts of your motorcycle. “Chromed” motorcycles look really bright and shiny. If you pass by motorcycles and see some parts that seem to look like mirrors, you can bet that those are chrome plated. Aside from making a motorcycle look shiny, chrome plating motorcycle parts have a lot of benefits and advantages. Most owners are not even aware of these.
The first advantage is that chroming makes your motorcycle look cooler. Most of us tend to look and stare at attractive vehicles that we see. If you own a chromed motorcycle, you’ll get lots of stares and admirations at how shiny and beautiful your motorcycle is. Who wouldn’t want that? For some, this might be a great way to start conversations with random people. The best way to flatter motorcycle owners is to compliment their ride. When your motorcycle is chromed, looks of awe and admiration are on your way.
For other benefits of chrome plating your motorcycle check out: {Reference: classiccomponents.com/blog2/benefits-to-chrome-plating-yo...}
Howard Hanna
Harvesters Chefs Classic
The American Restaurant
Kansas City, Missouri
(June 28, 2014)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Bonjwing Photography
Jorge Vallejo
Twelve Days of Christmas
Day 3: Christian Puglisi
The Restaurant at Meadowood
Meadowood Napa Valley
St. Helena, California
(December 8, 2015)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Bonjwing Photography
Cortney Burns
Twelve Days of Christmas: Nicolaus Balla & Cortney Burns
The Restaurant at Meadowood
Meadowood Napa Valley
St. Helena, California
(December 19, 2013)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | Bonjwing Photography
Joshua Skenes
Saison
San Francisco, California
(August 8, 2013)
the ulterior epicure | Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | Bonjwing Photography