View allAll Photos Tagged styrene
What you see are the basic elements of a sawmill complex arranged in a logical working order but with very little detailing done. On the right are a group of trees that i have since painted as freshly cut Ponderosa Pine with brownish red trunks and Douglas Fir with gray trunks. The trees have had their branches removed and are waiting in a spot where I plan to build a small mill pond for floating the logs. Then the logs are pulled up on a cardboard simulated log conveyor into the sawmill building for cutting into planks. I plan to build a reasonably realistic log conveyor and outside lumber sorting rack but will leave the saws to my viewers' imagination. Sawdust can be loaded into hopper cars for shipment to a paper mill if there is enough of it or it can be burned in the conical sawdust burner that I scratchbuilt years ago and modified this week. Finished lumber is bundled up, banded, and stored in the yellow storage building that is about to under another overhaul. Eventually i plan to separate this industrial area from the residential neighborhood by a photo mural background.
This sawmill started off as a Pola factory kit imported by Atlas over 40 years ago. The wall were originally brick with an opening on both ends for freight cars, and it had a brick out building with a tall brick smoke chimney. If you are on older modeler, you probably built one.
After sitting about 15 years in its original form, in order to Americanize the building, I replaced the walls with corrugated sheet metal from Campbell Scale Models and kept the same windows and some of the internal supports. I also replaced the plastic simulated sheet metal roof with more aluminum roofing glued to sheet plastic. Unfortunately, the sheet styrene I first used with the roof sections was too thin to offer good support, and to make matter worse, I glued it with Walther's Goo. I HATE that cursed stuff! It stinks, it's messy, and it does not hold. OK, the upper roof held together, but the lower roofs sagged many scale feet and looked horrible.
The sad, beat up, old factory sat in a storage box for three years after my new layout was up and running, and other old buildings had been refurbished. I needed an American style sawmill rather than the two European style sawmills that Pola offered in the 1960's and imported by Atlas and later by Model Power. Walthers produced a sawmill first in HO, then N scale that was part of a sawmill-lumber yard-paper mill complex featured in a fabulous ad in the January 1997 Model Railroader and reviewed in the August 1997 issue.
I did not copy but drew my inspiration from the Walthers sawmill kit which is just about the same size as my old Pola factory. With nothing to lose, I ripped off the old lower roof sections and pulled off the real aluminum roofing material. Next I cut some sub-roof sections from thicker (0.040") sheet styrene from Evergreen Scale Models and bonded the Campbell roofing with J B Weld epoxy instead of that nasty Goo. The same sheet also forms the new concrete floor of the sawmill. To reinforce the building I made vertical supports of ESM styrene strips 0.040" thick and 1/4." I use the same strip stock for making internal alignment keys to position removable buildings from their bases, shore up poor building wall joints from the inside, and as a horizontal tab to keep custom made roof sections from slipping off their walls.
The yellow building that I use for lumber storage is also a Pola kit. They marketed the kit as a European style sawmill. I cut the central tower off because it bore no resemblance to any sawmill I've seen, but the rest of the building looked like an American lumber yard building. I gave it an aluminum roof many years ago that held up very well; however, I need to open up the second story and figure out a logical way for my N scale workers to get lumber up there.
And you thought model railroading was just about running trains!
I'm one of those that went for the Hasselblad CFV-50c and best-shape C500 series set.
Typically, the CFV-50c is stuck onto a Linhof M679cs, but that combo is not a handsome one.
This image was shot with the following equipment:
Camera:
Linhof M679cs
Digital back:
CFV-50 (2010)
Lens:
Sinaron 125/5,6 Macro Apo Digital
Shutter:
Copal press
Lighting - Profoto Pro-B
1. grid (object above)
2. softbox (object right)
3. bare flash (object left, diffused with styrene board)
It took a bit but I was able to get the parts for the skeleton cut and assembled. I was also able to get the last 1:144 TIE in my local shop and, when paired with the scale figure, It makes the the ship seem even more imposing!
I still have to figure out how to get the rest of the TIEs. I could scan the model and 3d print more or I could make molds and resin copies.
I also began work on the hanger but it is VERY messy atm.
Private Jumbo from the upcoming Article for BrickJournal.
Custom Propellor
Modified Helmet
Belt Pockets - BrickForge
Nose - LEGO Antenna
Shoes - Custom
PROFILE:
Private Jumbo is the product of a secret government gene-splicing project. He never knew his real parents, and has been a ward of the state since his birth. The experiment was successful in that Jumbo is a physical marvel; he can dead lift at least one metric ton, and his genetically altered body makes him practically impervious to attack. For reasons unknown, he is keenly attuned to the emotions of others, and is thought to be at times overly sensitive. He is easily hurt by criticism, and needs constant reassurance. His continued adventures in this world weigh heavy on his simple mind. Here he sees clowns who entertain children and he wonders why he can’t do the same. Luckily, Blammo has helped keep his fragile emotions in check—for now.
WEAPONS:
Jumbo's primary weapon is himself. He has super-human strength and stamina, and is nearly impervious to pain. His emotions are his only weakness. The private is currently testing a new weapon design: The Big Bang. It can be loaded with almost anything at hand and fired. Because of its immense size, only Jumbo can operate it.
QUOTE:
"Bad people are bad. They should be more like good people."
Category: Model Kit.
Name: Galactic Patrol Space Cruiser Brittania II.
Scale: 1/100 scale.
Origin: Lensman, a series of science fiction novels by Edward E. "Doc" Smith and a 1984 Japanese anime titled: Lensman.
Brand: Tomy.
Series: Lensman.
Material: Styrene Plastic.
Release Date: 1984.
Condition: Unassembled.
*Note: This is a Model Kit collected by my BB.
More in My Collection Corner.
Shell Oil Company
59’5” 31,760gal Styrene Tank Car (DOT Class 117R100W)
SCMX 6517
Blt. Trinity Rail (TRN), 03/14 (SCMX 6000-6519)
Green Ln (CN Bala Sub), Markham, Ontario, Canada
July 7th, 2023
1600 x 1050
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Bell P-39 Airacobra was a fighter produced by Bell Aircraft produced for the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War II. It was one of the principal American fighters in service when the United States entered combat. It had an unusual layout, with the engine installed in the center fuselage, behind the pilot, and driving a tractor propeller in the nose with a long shaft. Although its mid-engine placement was innovative, the P-39 design was handicapped by the absence of an efficient turbo-supercharger, preventing it from performing high-altitude work, and it only had a limited fuel capacity. For this reason, it was rejected by the RAF for use over western Europe but adopted by the USSR, where most air combat took place at medium and lower altitudes.
The P-39 was an all-metal, low-wing, single-engine fighter, with a tricycle undercarriage and an Allison V-1710 liquid-cooled V-12 engine mounted in the central fuselage, directly behind the cockpit. The Airacobra was one of the first production fighters to be conceived as a "weapons system"; in this case the aircraft (known originally as the Bell Model 4) was designed to provide a platform for the 37 mm (1.46 in) T9 cannon. This weapon, which was designed in 1934 by the American Armament Corporation, a division of Oldsmobile, fired a 1.3 lb (0.59 kg) projectile capable of piercing .8 in (20 mm) of armor at 500 yd (460 m) with armor-piercing rounds. The 90 in (2,300 mm)-long, 200 lb (91 kg) weapon had to be rigidly mounted and fire parallel to and close to the centerline of the new fighter. The complete armament fit consisted of the T9 cannon with a pair of Browning M2 .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns mounted in the nose. This changed to two .50 in (12.7 mm) and two .30 in (7.62 mm) guns in the XP-39B (P-39C, Model 13, the first 20 delivered) and two .50 in (12.7 mm) and four .30 in (7.62 mm) (all four in the wings) in the P-39D (Model 15), which also introduced self-sealing tanks and shackles (and piping) for a 500 lb (230 kg) bomb or drop tank.
It would have been impossible to mount the weapon in the fuselage, firing through the cylinder banks of the Vee-configured engine and the propeller hub as could be done with smaller 20mm cannon. Weight, balance and visibility considerations meant that the cockpit could not be placed farther back in the fuselage, behind the engine and cannon. The solution adopted was to mount the cannon in the forward fuselage and the engine in the center fuselage, directly behind the pilot's seat. The tractor propeller was driven with a 10-foot-long (3.0 m) drive shaft made in two sections, incorporating a self-aligning bearing to accommodate fuselage deflection during violent maneuvers. This shaft ran through a tunnel in the cockpit floor and was connected to a gearbox in the nose of the fuselage which, in turn, drove the three- or (later) four-bladed propeller by way of a short central shaft. The gearbox was provided with its own lubrication system, separate from the engine; in later versions of the Airacobra the gearbox was provided with some armor protection.
The glycol-cooled radiator was fitted in the wing center section, immediately beneath the engine; this was flanked on either side by a single drum-shaped oil cooler. Air for the radiator and oil coolers was drawn in through intakes in both wing-root leading edges and was directed via four ducts to the radiator faces. The air was then exhausted through three controllable hinged flaps near the trailing edge of the center section. Air for the carburetor was drawn in through a raised oval intake immediately aft of the rear canopy. Because of the unconventional layout, there was no space in the fuselage to place a fuel tank. Although drop tanks were implemented to extend its range, the standard fuel load was carried in the wings, with the result that the P-39 was limited to short-range tactical strikes.
The fuselage structure was unusual and innovative, being based on a strong central keel that incorporated the armament, cockpit, and engine. Two strong fuselage beams to port and starboard formed the basis of the structure. These were angled upwards fore and aft to create mounting points for the T9 cannon and propeller reduction gearbox and for the engine and accessories respectively. A strong arched bulkhead provided the main structural attachment point for the main spar of the wing. This arch incorporated a fireproof panel and an armor plate between the engine and the cockpit. It also incorporated a turnover pylon and a pane of bullet-resistant glass behind the pilot's head. The arch also formed the basis of the cockpit housing; the pilot's seat was attached to the forward face as was the cockpit floor. Forward of the cockpit the fuselage nose was formed from large removable covers. A long nose wheel well was incorporated in the lower nose section – the Airacobra was the first fighter fitted with a tricycle undercarriage. The engine and accessories were attached to the rear of the arch and the main structural beams; these too were covered using large removable panels. A conventional semi-monocoque rear fuselage was attached aft of the main structure.
Because the pilot was above the extension shaft, he was placed higher in the fuselage than in most contemporary fighters, which in turn gave the pilot a good field of view. Access to the cockpit was by way of sideways opening "car doors", one on either side. Both had wind-down windows. As only the right-hand door had a handle both inside and outside, this was used as the normal means of access and egress. The left-hand door could be opened only from the outside and was for emergency use, although both doors could be jettisoned. In operational use, as the roof was fixed, the cockpit design made escape difficult in an emergency.
The Airacobra saw combat throughout the world, particularly in the Southwest Pacific, Mediterranean and Soviet theaters. In both western Europe and the Pacific, the Airacobra found itself outclassed as an interceptor and the type was gradually relegated to other duties. It often was used at lower altitudes for such missions as ground strafing. Beyond the USAAF and the USSR, other major users of the type included the Free French, the Royal Air Force, and the Italian Co-Belligerent Air Force. Minor operators were Australia, the Netherlands (the ML-KNIL) and New Zealand.
In 1942, the threat of attack seemed real: the city of Darwin was bombed, New Guinea was invaded, and Japanese reconnaissance aircraft overflew Auckland and Wellington. The New Zealand Government hurriedly formed 488 Squadron's pilots, battle-experienced from the fall of Singapore in February 1942, into the RNZAF's first active fighter unit: No. 14 Squadron. The unit was established under Squadron Leader John MacKenzie at Masterton on 25 April 1942, equipped with North American Harvards, a handful of P-40 Kittyhawks and leftover Brewster Buffaloes from the disbanded 488 Squadron, and with 23 re-conditioned P-39D Airacobras, on loan from the U.S. Fifth Air Force (5 AF) after having been repaired in Australia. The Airacobras were initially used by the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) as a stop-gap interceptor in rear areas until more P-40s could be obtained, but the lack of first-line aircraft soon forced them into battle.
The Allied plan was for the Americans to defeat the Japanese by island hopping north across the Pacific. This plan involved bypassing major Japanese bases, which would continue to operate in the allied rear. The RNZAF was given the job of operating against these bypassed Japanese units. At first, maritime patrol and bomber units moved into the Pacific, followed by 15 Squadron with Kittyhawks. In April 1943, a year after forming, 14 Squadron moved to the rear base at Espiritu Santo to resume action against the Japanese. The unit was now primarily equipped with P-40s, which became the primary RNZAF fighter of the era. But 14 Squadron also received thirty-six new P-39Qs, too, which had the wing-mounted pairs of 0.30 in (7.62 mm) machine guns replaced with a 0.50 in (12.7 mm) with 300 rounds of ammunition in a pod under each wing and 231 lb (105 kg) of extra armor. Due to their limited performance at altitude and their tendency to stall in a tight turn and possibly go into a flat spin (due to the engine behind the center-of-gravity), which many a pilot did not recover from, the P-39s were primarily used for ground attack and reconnaissance missions, and against naval targets close to the shorelines, e .g. troopships.
For the remainder of the war, 14 Squadron rotated between forward and rear bases in the Pacific and 6-week periods of home leave in New Zealand. On 11 June 1943, 14 Squadron moved to the forward base of Kukum Field on Guadalcanal—on its first contact with the enemy, the following day, six Japanese aircraft were destroyed. The squadron later deployed to different bases in the South Pacific as demanded: In November 1943, 14 Squadron moved for the first time to New Georgia, followed by Bougainville in February 1944, Green Island in December, and Emirau in July 1945. In 1944, No. 14 Squadron became one of thirteen RNZAF squadrons re-equipped with Vought F4U Corsairs, which replaced all remaining P-39s. By this time the Japanese fighters had been all but eliminated and the unit increasingly attacked ground targets.
General characteristics:
Crew: One
Length: 30 ft 2 in (9.19 m)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 12 ft 5 in (3.78 m)
Wing area: 213 sq ft (19.8 m²)
Empty weight: 6,516 lb (2,956 kg)
Gross weight: 7,570 lb (3,434 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,400 lb (3,810 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Allison V-1710-85 V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine,
delivering 1,200 hp (890 kW) at 9,000 ft (2,743 m) at emergency power,
driving a 3-bladed constant-speed propeller
Performance:
Maximum speed: 389 mph (626 km/h, 338 kn)
Stall speed: 95 mph (153 km/h, 83 kn) power off, flaps and undercarriage down
Never exceed speed: 525 mph (845 km/h, 456 kn)
Range: 525 mi (845 km, 456 nmi) on internal fuel
Service ceiling: 35,000 ft (11,000 m)
Rate of climb: 3,805 ft/min (19.33 m/s) at 7,400 ft (2,300 m), using emergency power
Time to altitude: 15,000 ft (4,600 m) in 4 minutes 30 seconds, at 160 mph (260 km/h)
Wing loading: 34.6 lb/sq ft (169 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.16 hp/lb (0.26 kW/kg)
Armament:
1× 37 mm (1.5 in) M4 cannon with 30 rounds, firing through the propeller hub
4× 0.5 in (12.7 mm) Browning M2 machine guns,
two synchronized with 200 RPG in the nose, one with 300 RPG under each outer wing
1× ventral hardpoint for up to 500 lb (230 kg) of bombs or a drop tank
The kit and its assembly:
This was a quick project, a simple “livery whif” based on a profile drawing of a fictional RNZAF P-39, created by fellow board member PantherG at whatifmodellers.com and published in June 2021. Since the fictional livery aspect of this build would be the centerpiece, I chose the cheap and simple Hobby Boss P-39 kit from 2007 as basis. There are two Hobby Boss kits of the P-39: an N and a Q boxing, but both are identical and only differ through the decals. To build an N, you leave away the underwing gun pods, and for a Q you cut away the machine gun barrels from the wings.
The kit is rather primitive and sturdy, but it still needs some PSR around the fuselage seams. However, from the outside the Hobby Boss kit is a decent representation of a P-39 – if you want a (really) quick build and/or you are on a budget, it’s O.K. The kit was built OOB, I just added a pilot figure to the (primitive) cockpit with seat belts made from masking tape, since this would be the only detail inside to be recognizable, and I added a radio set behind the seat to fill the empty space above the engine cover. The openings for the fuselage-mounted machine guns had to be carved into the hull. I used the OOB propeller mount with its thin steel axis, because it is more compact than my own usual styrene tube arrangement – the leftover space in the nose was filled with lead to keep the front wheel on the ground. However, the literally massive tail of the model necessitated even more nose weight, so that the front landing gear well was partly filled with lead, too. Not pretty, but the lead beads are only visible directly from below – and it was eventually enough to keep the nose down!
Painting and markings:
This model is not a 1:1 hardware rendition of PantherG’s drawing, rather a personal interpretation of the idea that the RNZAF had operated the P-39 in the PTO around 1943. However, I took over the basic USAAF livery in overall Olive Drab 41 with Neutral Grey 43 (FS 36173) undersides, plus generous Medium Green 42 (~FS 34094) contrast blotches on the edges of the aerodynamic surfaces to break up the aircraft’s outlines.
The paints became Tamiya XF-62 (IMHO the best rendition of the USAAF tone) with Humbrol 105 (FS 34097) for the additional wing cammo, and Humbrol 165 (RAF Medium Grey, a lighter tone than Neutral Grey) underneath. 105 was chosen because it gives a good contrast to the Olive Drab background, and it is not too bluish. The cockpit interior and the landing gear wells were painted in zinc chromate green - Humbrol 159 was used.
A black ink washing and some post-panel-shading followed, with stronger weathering on the upper surfaces to simulate sun-bleaching. The markings are roughly based on a contemporary RNZAF P-40M, and it is a wild mix. The ex-USAAF camouflage would not be used by the RNZAF, but the white ID bands on wings and fuselage as well as the white spinner are typical for the time. The same goes for the roundels, which still contained tiny red discs at the fuselage roundels’ center. Oddly, very different roundels were carried above and below the wings. As a repaired and re-badged ex-USAAF aircraft, I added overpainted markings of this former operator – the serial number on the fin as well as the former bars of the American markings were painted over with (a sort of) Foliage Green (Humbrol 172).
The national markings, the serial number and the small nose art came from a Rising Decals sheet for various RNZAF aircraft types, while the white stripes were improvised with generic decal sheet material (TL Modellbau). The RAF-style tactical code was not carried by the RNZAF’s machines, but I added them, anyway, because they might have been left over from early RNZAF operations. However, together with the white ID bands, there’s a lot going on along the fuselage – white code letters would certainly have been “too much”. The code letters in Medium Sea Grey came from an Xtradecal sheet, and due to the little space on the rear fuselage the unit code “HQ” was placed on the nose – in a fashion similar to the RAAF’s few P-39s.
After a light black ink washing and some post shading and weathering (e. g. exhaust stains with graphite), the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and wire antennae from heated sprue material added.
Well, from the construction perspective, this was a very simple project, and despite the Hobby Boss kit’s basic constriction, the result looks quite good. Even the canopy – normally a weak spot of these kits – looks decent. And I was lucky that I could cramp enough weight into the nose space that the model actually rests on all of its wheels. The camouflage is not spectacular, either, just the markings, esp. the ID bands, caused some headaches, but thanks to generic white decal stripes even such details lose their horror. A nice-looking what-if Airacobra, and I feel inclined to create a contemporary ML-KNIL machine someday, too. :D
1:34 scale model by First Gear Diecast of a Wittke Superduty Front-Load Refuse Truck body on a Mack MR chassis. I handbuilt the carry-can attachment out of styrene.
I mostly just took this picture to practice with HDR photography.
printed directly from an antique original glass plate: taken in 1900 / measures 5" x 7"
styrene board pre-coated with professional white medium (300mm x 220mm) / exposed for 2hrs
Sensitizer: VanDyke Brown print solution
Fixing agent: Citric acid solution & sodium thiosulfate solution (applied with a brush)
Toning: Bostick & Sullivan Gold toning kit (Ammonium Thiocyanate / Gold Chloride)
Enlarger: LPL Model 7451 large format enlarger (EL Nikkor 150mm / F5.6)
Light source: High power (50w) UV LED unit (SMD=surface mounted LED modules)
The condenser unit (= a unit in which two 16cm diameter convex lenses are set facing each other) was removed from my old Hansa patent enlarger for use in LPL Model 7451.
----
New group was created. If you like, please join.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Henschel Hs 126 was a German two-seat reconnaissance and observation aircraft of World War II that was derived from the stillborn Henschel Hs 122. The pilot was seated in a protected cockpit under the parasol wing and the gunner in an open rear cockpit. The first prototype was not entirely up to Luftwaffe standards; it was followed by two more development planes equipped with different engines. Following the third prototype, ten pre-production planes were built in 1937. The Hs 126 entered service in 1938 after operational evaluation with the Legion Condor contingent to the Spanish Civil War.
By the time the Hs 126 A-1 joined the Luftwaffe, the re-equipping of reconnaissance formations was already well advanced. By the start of World War II in September 1939, the Hs 126 served with many reconnaissance units. They were used with great success in the attack on Poland where it proved itself as a reliable observation and liaison aircraft. Its use continued after the end of the Phony War in May 1940, but with more and more Allied fighters appearing over the theatre of operations, the type’s main weakness became apparent: the Hs 126 was rather slow and could hardly avoid or even escape from fighter attacks. The losses were dramatic: alone twenty Hs 126s were lost between 10 and 21 May 1940!
The Hs 126 was initially produced in two versions, which only differed through their engines. 47 squadrons equipped with Hs 126 A/B participated in the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, and the Hs 126 was also successfully used in North Africa. However, low top speed was the Hs 126’s main weakness. To rectify this deficiency, the Hs 126 was in late 1940 experimentally outfitted with a more powerful BMW 132K which replaced the Hs 126 A’s Bramo or the B’s BMW 9-cylinder radial engine, which delivered around 625 kW (850 PS) each. The new powerplant delivered up to 809 kW (1,085 hp) with 96 octane fuel injection at take-off and as emergency power, and 705 kW (960 hp) at normal military power. This extra power, together with an aerodynamically more efficient cowling, pushed maximum speed to 400 km/h (250 mph), and after successful tests in the 1940/41 winter the RLM accepted it as the Hs 126 C for production and service.
Beyond the new engine the serial production Hs 126 C-1 did not differ much visibly from its predecessors, even though the internal structure was simplified and lightened by roughly 50 kg (110 lb). Various Reihenbildgeräte (reconnaissance cameras) could be installed in a compartment at the rear of the cabin, and the defensive armament was upgraded with heavy 13 mm MG 131 machine guns instead of the former 7.92 mm weapons. Sometimes, a MG 81Z 7.92 twin machine gun was alternatively fitted in the rear cockpit instead of the MG 131, which offered a higher rate of fire.
An interesting sub-variant of the Hs 126 C was the Hs 126 C-2, a dedicated observation and liaison floatplane for theatres of operation with difficult terrain where sufficient airfields were rare or hard to install and where alternatively bodies of water could be used for landing. Around thirty Hs 126 Cs were modified with twin floats instead of the type’s standard spatted fixed landing gear. They were, however, unlike the Arado Ar 196 shipboard reconnaissance floatplane, not capable of catapult starts and not intended for operations at high sea. Other changes included a ventral fin for improved directional stability, additional fuel tanks in the floats that compensated the loss of range through the floats’ drag, and the land-based Hs 126s optional shackles for light bombs under the fuselage were deleted to compensate for the floats’ extra weight, and there was no free space left to ensure a safe bomb release.
Another feature that was developed for the Hs 126 C after field experiences with the aircraft during winter operations was an extended cockpit glazing to better protect the observer from the elements. It covered the while rear section of the cockpit opening but still was open at the rear. It was mounted on rails and could be pushed forward, under the original glasshouse for the pilot. This canopy extension was offered as a Rüstsatz (field modification kit) for older Hs 126 variants, too, and modified aircraft received the suffix “R1” to their designation.
Only 150 Hs 126 Cs (32 of them C-2 floatplanes) were built between early 1941 and 1942, production of the Hs 126 A/B had already ended in 1941. Most of them were operated in Denmark and Norway, even though a few were also allocated to Aufklärergruppen in the Mediterranean where they operated in the Adriatic Sea.
The Hs 126 was well received for its good short takeoff and low-speed characteristics which were needed at the time. However, it was vulnerable and the Hs 126 A/Bs were already retired from frontline units in 1942, the better-performing Hs 126 Cs only a year later. The type was soon superseded by the light general-purpose STOL Fieseler Fi 156 Storch, which was simpler and cheaper to produce, and the medium-range two-engine twin-boom Focke-Wulf Fw 189 "flying eye" with a fully enclosed cockpit and a better defensive armament. However, many Hs 126s were still operated for some time in areas with little Allied aerial threat, or second-line duties as glider tugs or liaison aircraft.
General characteristics:
Crew: Two (pilot and observer/gunner)
Length: 10,90 m (35 ft 7 in) fuselage only
11,52 m (37 ft 9 in) overall
Wingspan: 14.5 m (47 ft 7 in)
Height: 4,61 m (15 ft 1 in) from waterline
Wing area: 31.6 m² (340 sqft)
Empty weight: 2,030 kg (4,480 lb)
Loaded weight: 3,090 kg (6,820 lb)
Powerplant:
1× BMW 132K air-cooled 9-cylinder radial engine with 809 kW (1,085 hp) emergency power
and 705 kW (960 hp) continuous output
Performance:
Maximum speed: 360 km/h (223 mph) at 3,000 m (9,850 ft) with floats
(C-1: 400 km/h (248 mph) with wheels)
Travelling speed: 280 km/h /174 mph)
(C-1: 300 km/h (186 mph)
Landing speed: 115 km/h (71 mph)
Range: 998 km (620 mi)
Service ceiling: 8,530 m (28,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 550 m/min (1,800 ft/min)
Time to height: 4,4 min to 1.000 m (3.275 ft)
14 min to 3.000 m (9826 ft)
Wing loading: 97.8 kg/m2 (20.1 lb/sqft)
Power/mass: 0.21 kW/kg (0.13 hp/lb)
Armament:
1× forward-firing 13 mm (.511 in) MG 131 machine gun
1× flexible, rearward-firing 13 mm (.511 in) MG 131 machine gun
The kit and its assembly:
This build was inspired by a similar project done by fellow modeler ericr at whatfimodellers.com in 1:48 a while ago: a combination of the German land-based Hs 126 observation aircraft with twin floats from an Ar 196 seaplane. This combo looked very natural and balanced, so I decided to re-create a personal interpretation in my “home scale” 1:72.
Basically, this what-if model is a straightforward combination of the Italeri Hs 126 A (a venerable but pretty good model, even today, despite raised panel lines) with floats from a Heller Ar 196 A (also a slightly dated but very nice model, also with raised panel lines). The selling point of both kits is their good fit and overall simplicity, even though mounting the Hs 126’s wings to the fuselage – it is held only at six points – is a tricky task. Furthermore, once the wing is in place, painting the area in front of the cockpit as well as the windscreen area is quite difficult, so that I did that ahead of the final assembly.
The Ar 196 floats feature lots of struts, and to mount them (only) under the fuselage the outer supports had to go, because they are normally attached to the Ar 196’s mid-wing section. What was a bit challenging is the struts’ attachment points on the floats: they come with square bases that offer relatively big surfaces to glue the party in place, adding stability to the whole construction. However, blending these areas into each other called for some PSR.
A similar attachment solution was chosen by Heller to mount the floats’ struts to the Ar 196 hull – again, the “end plates” had to go and the struts had to be trimmed to keep the floats parallel to the fuselage. Since the outer supports were gone, I added diagonal stabilizers between the front and rear struts cluster.
To add a personal twist and depict an evolutionary late version of the Hs 126, I decided to swap the engine for a donor part from a Matchbox He 115 – it is basically the same engine, but the cowling is slightly wider and cleaner. The engine part itself is simpler. Just a disc with an engine relief. But with the propeller in place (mounted on a metal axis to spin free), this is not obvious. With scratched exhaust pipes, the new cowling gives the aircraft a slightly more modern and beefier look?
Another personal addition is improved crew comfort: the original Hs 126 observer workplace was totally open, just protected by spoilers on the canopy that only covered the pilot’s station. Esp. at wintertime this must have been a real P!TA place, so that I tried to extend the glazing. A raid in the spares box revealed two things that created an almost perfect combo: a Hs 126 glazing from a Matchbox kit and a rear canopy section from the spurious ESCI Ka-34 “Hokum” kit. The Matchbox parts’ selling point: it fits perfectly into the respective opening on the Italeri kit and has a slightly “boxier” roof shape, which better too up the square profile of the Hokum cockpit, which, itself, perfectly fell into place over the observer station! To adapt the modern piece to the highly braced Hs 126 glazing I added fake stiffeners made from adhesive tape cross- and lengthwise. I thought that just painting braces onto the flat windows was not enough, and with some paint the tape’s 3D effect looks quite convincing!
Other small additions are a barrel for the machine gun the cowling, a stabilizing fin made from styrene sheet material and PE ladders from the floats into the cockpit on both sides.
Painting and markings:
I wanted an authentic Luftwaffe livery – but the Hs 126 and similar German recce planes of the mid-WWII era only offer a small range of camouflage options. The generic paint scheme was a splinter pattern in RLM 70/71/65 with a low, hard waterline. Africa as optional theatre of operations offered some variations with field-modifications of this basic scheme with German and Italian sand added on top – but that would not have been the right option for a floatplane, I guess?
Eventually I decided to locate the model’s unit far up North and to add improvised winter camouflage to the standard livery. It was applied just as in real life: first, the whole model received its standard splinter camouflage with Humbrol 30, 91 and 65, then the decals were applied. The latter were puzzled together from the scrap box, using simplified Eiserne Kreuze without black edges. The white unit emblems are fictional and come from an MPM He 100 kit with spurious PR markings. The tactical code is “plausible” (“9W” is the AufklGr. 122’s unit code, “D” denotes the 4th aircraft, and “C” is the verification letter for the Stabgeschwader of the unit’s 2nd group) and created from single letters/digits. The black and the green have no strong contrast to the camouflage, but this style was common Luftwaffe practice. The Stabflieger color green was also incorporated on the spinner, another very typical Luftwaffe marking to denote an aircraft’s operational unit.
The temporary whitewash was the applied with white acrylic paint (Revell 05) and a flat, soft brush. Once dry, the whole model received a light black ink washing, post-panel shading and a light treatment with wet sandpaper on the white areas to simulate wear and tear. After some exhaust stains were created with graphite, the model was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Well, not a spectacular what-if model, and mounting the Hs 126 on floats was trickier than one would expect at first glance. Pimping the rather dull Luftwaffe standard livery with whitewash was a good move, though, adding an interesting and individual twist to the aircraft. And the resulting whole “package” looks pretty convincing?
Category: Model Kit.
Name: DSV 1, The Liberator Starship.
Scale: 1/5 millispacials.
Origin: BBC TV Series: Blake's 7.
Brand: Comet Miniatures.
Material: Styrene plastic.
Release Date: 1998.
Condition: Unassembled.
*Note: This is a Model Kit collected by my BB.
More in My Collection Corner.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The OV-10 Bronco was initially conceived in the early 1960s through an informal collaboration between W. H. Beckett and Colonel K. P. Rice, U.S. Marine Corps, who met at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California, and who also happened to live near each other. The original concept was for a rugged, simple, close air support aircraft integrated with forward ground operations. At the time, the U.S. Army was still experimenting with armed helicopters, and the U.S. Air Force was not interested in close air support.
The concept aircraft was to operate from expedient forward air bases using roads as runways. Speed was to be from very slow to medium subsonic, with much longer loiter times than a pure jet. Efficient turboprop engines would give better performance than piston engines. Weapons were to be mounted on the centerline to get efficient aiming. The inventors favored strafing weapons such as self-loading recoilless rifles, which could deliver aimed explosive shells with less recoil than cannons, and a lower per-round weight than rockets. The airframe was to be designed to avoid the back blast.
Beckett and Rice developed a basic platform meeting these requirements, then attempted to build a fiberglass prototype in a garage. The effort produced enthusiastic supporters and an informal pamphlet describing the concept. W. H. Beckett, who had retired from the Marine Corps, went to work at North American Aviation to sell the aircraft.
The aircraft's design supported effective operations from forward bases. The OV-10 had a central nacelle containing a crew of two in tandem and space for cargo, and twin booms containing twin turboprop engines. The visually distinctive feature of the aircraft is the combination of the twin booms, with the horizontal stabilizer that connected them at the fin tips. The OV-10 could perform short takeoffs and landings, including on aircraft carriers and large-deck amphibious assault ships without using catapults or arresting wires. Further, the OV-10 was designed to take off and land on unimproved sites. Repairs could be made with ordinary tools. No ground equipment was required to start the engines. And, if necessary, the engines would operate on high-octane automobile fuel with only a slight loss of power.
The aircraft had responsive handling and could fly for up to 5½ hours with external fuel tanks. The cockpit had extremely good visibility for both pilot and co-pilot, provided by a wrap-around "greenhouse" that was wider than the fuselage. North American Rockwell custom ejection seats were standard, with many successful ejections during service. With the second seat removed, the OV-10 could carry 3,200 pounds (1,500 kg) of cargo, five paratroopers, or two litter patients and an attendant. Empty weight was 6,969 pounds (3,161 kg). Normal operating fueled weight with two crew was 9,908 pounds (4,494 kg). Maximum takeoff weight was 14,446 pounds (6,553 kg).
The bottom of the fuselage bore sponsons or "stub wings" that improved flight performance by decreasing aerodynamic drag underneath the fuselage. Normally, four 7.62 mm (.308 in) M60C machine guns were carried on the sponsons, accessed through large forward-opening hatches. The sponsons also had four racks to carry bombs, pods, or fuel. The wings outboard of the engines contained two additional hardpoints, one per side. Racked armament in the Vietnam War was usually seven-shot 2.75 in (70 mm) rocket pods with white phosphorus marker rounds or high-explosive rockets, or 5" (127 mm) four-shot Zuni rocket pods. Bombs, ADSIDS air-delivered/para-dropped unattended seismic sensors, Mk-6 battlefield illumination flares, and other stores were also carried.
Operational experience showed some weaknesses in the OV-10's design. It was significantly underpowered, which contributed to crashes in Vietnam in sloping terrain because the pilots could not climb fast enough. While specifications stated that the aircraft could reach 26,000 feet (7,900 m), in Vietnam the aircraft could reach only 18,000 feet (5,500 m). Also, no OV-10 pilot survived ditching the aircraft.
The OV-10 served in the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy, as well as in the service of a number of other countries. In U.S. military service, the Bronco was operated until the early Nineties, and obsoleted USAF OV-10s were passed on to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms for anti-drug operations. A number of OV-10As furthermore ended up in the hands of the California Department of Forestry (CDF) and were used for spotting fires and directing fire bombers onto hot spots.
This was not the end of the OV-10 in American military service, though: In 2012, the type gained new attention because of its unique qualities. A $20 million budget was allocated to activate an experimental USAF unit of two airworthy OV-10Gs, acquired from NASA and the State Department. These machines were retrofitted with military equipment and were, starting in May 2015, deployed overseas to support Operation “Inherent Resolve”, flying more than 120 combat sorties over 82 days over Iraq and Syria. Their concrete missions remained unclear, and it is speculated they provided close air support for Special Forces missions, esp. in confined urban environments where the Broncos’ loitering time and high agility at low speed and altitude made them highly effective and less vulnerable than helicopters.
Furthermore, these Broncos reputedly performed strikes with the experimental AGR-20A “Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS)”, a Hydra 70-millimeter rocket with a laser-seeking head as guidance - developed for precision strikes against small urban targets with little collateral damage. The experiment ended satisfactorily, but the machines were retired again, and the small unit was dissolved.
However, the machines had shown their worth in asymmetric warfare, and the U.S. Air Force decided to invest in reactivating the OV-10 on a regular basis, despite the overhead cost of operating an additional aircraft type in relatively small numbers – but development and production of a similar new type would have caused much higher costs, with an uncertain time until an operational aircraft would be ready for service. Re-activating a proven design and updating an existing airframe appeared more efficient.
The result became the MV-10H, suitably christened “Super Bronco” but also known as “Black Pony”, after the program's internal name. This aircraft was derived from the official OV-10X proposal by Boeing from 2009 for the USAF's Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance requirement. Initially, Boeing proposed to re-start OV-10 manufacture, but this was deemed uneconomical, due to the expected small production number of new serial aircraft, so the “Black Pony” program became a modernization project. In consequence, all airframes for the "new" MV-10Hs were recovered OV-10s of various types from the "boneyard" at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.
While the revamped aircraft would maintain much of its 1960s-vintage rugged external design, modernizations included a completely new, armored central fuselage with a highly modified cockpit section, ejection seats and a computerized glass cockpit. The “Black Pony” OV-10 had full dual controls, so that either crewmen could steer the aircraft while the other operated sensors and/or weapons. This feature would also improve survivability in case of incapacitation of a crew member as the result from a hit.
The cockpit armor protected the crew and many vital systems from 23mm shells and shrapnel (e. g. from MANPADS). The crew still sat in tandem under a common, generously glazed canopy with flat, bulletproof panels for reduced sun reflections, with the pilot in the front seat and an observer/WSO behind. The Bronco’s original cargo capacity and the rear door were retained, even though the extra armor and defensive measures like chaff/flare dispensers as well as an additional fuel cell in the central fuselage limited the capacity. However, it was still possible to carry and deploy personnel, e. g. small special ops teams of up to four when the aircraft flew in clean configuration.
Additional updates for the MV-10H included structural reinforcements for a higher AUW and higher g load maneuvers, similar to OV-10D+ standards. The landing gear was also reinforced, and the aircraft kept its ability to operate from short, improvised airstrips. A fixed refueling probe was added to improve range and loiter time.
Intelligence sensors and smart weapon capabilities included a FLIR sensor and a laser range finder/target designator, both mounted in a small turret on the aircraft’s nose. The MV-10H was also outfitted with a data link and the ability to carry an integrated targeting pod such as the Northrop Grumman LITENING or the Lockheed Martin Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP). Also included was the Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver (ROVER) to provide live sensor data and video recordings to personnel on the ground.
To improve overall performance and to better cope with the higher empty weight of the modified aircraft as well as with operations under hot-and-high conditions, the engines were beefed up. The new General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines improved the Bronco's performance considerably: top speed increased by 100 mph (160 km/h), the climb rate was tripled (a weak point of early OV-10s despite the type’s good STOL capability) and both take-off as well as landing run were almost halved. The new engines called for longer nacelles, and their circular diameter markedly differed from the former Garrett T76-G-420/421 turboprop engines. To better exploit the additional power and reduce the aircraft’s audio signature, reversible contraprops, each with eight fiberglass blades, were fitted. These allowed a reduced number of revolutions per minute, resulting in less noise from the blades and their tips, while the engine responsiveness was greatly improved. The CT7-9Ds’ exhausts were fitted with muzzlers/air mixers to further reduce the aircraft's noise and heat signature.
Another novel and striking feature was the addition of so-called “tip sails” to the wings: each wingtip was elongated with a small, cigar-shaped fairing, each carrying three staggered, small “feather blade” winglets. Reputedly, this installation contributed ~10% to the higher climb rate and improved lift/drag ratio by ~6%, improving range and loiter time, too.
Drawing from the Iraq experience as well as from the USMC’s NOGS test program with a converted OV-10D as a night/all-weather gunship/reconnaissance platform, the MV-10H received a heavier gun armament: the original four light machine guns that were only good for strafing unarmored targets were deleted and their space in the sponsons replaced by avionics. Instead, the aircraft was outfitted with a lightweight M197 three-barrel 20mm gatling gun in a chin turret. This could be fixed in a forward position at high speed or when carrying forward-firing ordnance under the stub wings, or it could be deployed to cover a wide field of fire under the aircraft when it was flying slower, being either slaved to the FLIR or to a helmet sighting auto targeting system.
The original seven hardpoints were retained (1x ventral, 2x under each sponson, and another pair under the outer wings), but the total ordnance load was slightly increased and an additional pair of launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinders or other light AAMs under the wing tips were added – not only as a defensive measure, but also with an anti-helicopter role in mind; four more Sidewinders could be carried on twin launchers under the outer wings against aerial targets. Other guided weapons cleared for the MV-10H were the light laser-guided AGR-20A and AGM-119 Hellfire missiles, the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System upgrade to the light Hydra 70 rockets, the new Laser Guided Zuni Rocket which had been cleared for service in 2010, TV-/IR-/laser-guided AGM-65 Maverick AGMs and AGM-122 Sidearm anti-radar missiles, plus a wide range of gun and missile pods, iron and cluster bombs, as well as ECM and flare/chaff pods, which were not only carried defensively, but also in order to disrupt enemy ground communication.
In this configuration, a contract for the conversion of twelve mothballed American Broncos to the new MV-10H standard was signed with Boeing in 2016, and the first MV-10H was handed over to the USAF in early 2018, with further deliveries lasting into early 2020. All machines were allocated to the newly founded 919th Special Operations Support Squadron at Duke Field (Florida). This unit was part of the 919th Special Operations Wing, an Air Reserve Component (ARC) of the United States Air Force. It was assigned to the Tenth Air Force of Air Force Reserve Command and an associate unit of the 1st Special Operations Wing, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). If mobilized the wing was gained by AFSOC (Air Force Special Operations Command) to support Special Tactics, the U.S. Air Force's special operations ground force. Similar in ability and employment to Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC), U.S. Army Special Forces and U.S. Navy SEALs, Air Force Special Tactics personnel were typically the first to enter combat and often found themselves deep behind enemy lines in demanding, austere conditions, usually with little or no support.
The MV-10Hs are expected to provide support for these ground units in the form of all-weather reconnaissance and observation, close air support and also forward air control duties for supporting ground units. Precision ground strikes and protection from enemy helicopters and low-flying aircraft were other, secondary missions for the modernized Broncos, which are expected to serve well into the 2040s. Exports or conversions of foreign OV-10s to the Black Pony standard are not planned, though.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 42 ft 2½ in (12,88 m) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 45 ft 10½ in(14 m) incl. tip sails
Height: 15 ft 2 in (4.62 m)
Wing area: 290.95 sq ft (27.03 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 64A315
Empty weight: 9,090 lb (4,127 kg)
Gross weight: 13,068 lb (5,931 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 17,318 lb (7,862 kg)
Powerplant:
2× General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines, 1,305 kW (1,750 hp) each,
driving 8-bladed Hamilton Standard 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m) diameter constant-speed,
fully feathering, reversible contra-rotating propellers with metal hub and composite blades
Performance:
Maximum speed: 390 mph (340 kn, 625 km/h)
Combat range: 198 nmi (228 mi, 367 km)
Ferry range: 1,200 nmi (1,400 mi, 2,200 km) with auxiliary fuel
Maximum loiter time: 5.5 h with auxiliary fuel
Service ceiling: 32.750 ft (10,000 m)
13,500 ft (4.210 m) on one engine
Rate of climb: 17.400 ft/min (48 m/s) at sea level
Take-off run: 480 ft (150 m)
740 ft (227 m) to 50 ft (15 m)
1,870 ft (570 m) to 50 ft (15 m) at MTOW
Landing run: 490 ft (150 m)
785 ft (240 m) at MTOW
1,015 ft (310 m) from 50 ft (15 m)
Armament:
1x M197 3-barreled 20 mm Gatling cannon in a chin turret with 750 rounds ammo capacity
7x hardpoints for a total load of 5.000 lb (2,270 kg)
2x wingtip launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional Bronco update/conversion was simply spawned by the idea: could it be possible to replace the original cockpit section with one from an AH-1 Cobra, for a kind of gunship version?
The basis is the Academy OV-10D kit, mated with the cockpit section from a Fujimi AH-1S TOW Cobra (Revell re-boxing, though), chosen because of its “boxy” cockpit section with flat glass panels – I think that it conveys the idea of an armored cockpit section best. Combining these parts was not easy, though, even though the plan sound simple. Initially, the Bronco’s twin booms, wings and stabilizer were built separately, because this made PSR on these sections easier than trying the same on a completed airframe. One of the initial challenges: the different engines. I wanted something uprated, and a different look, and I had a pair of (excellent!) 1:144 resin engines from the Russian company Kompakt Zip for a Tu-95 bomber at hand, which come together with movable(!) eight-blade contraprops that were an almost perfect size match for the original three-blade props. Biggest problem: the Tu-95 nacelles have a perfectly circular diameter, while the OV-10’s booms are square and rectangular. Combining these parts and shapes was already a messy PST affair, but it worked out quite well – even though the result rather reminds of some Chinese upgrade measure (anyone know the Tu-4 copies with turboprops? This here looks similar!). But while not pretty, I think that the beafier look works well and adds to the idea of a “revived” aircraft. And you can hardly beat the menacing look of contraprops on anything...
The exotic, so-called “tip sails” on the wings, mounted on short booms, are a detail borrowed from the Shijiazhuang Y-5B-100, an updated Chinese variant/copy of the Antonov An-2 biplane transporter. The booms are simple pieces of sprue from the Bronco kit, the winglets were cut from 0.5mm styrene sheet.
For the cockpit donor, the AH-1’s front section was roughly built, including the engine section (which is a separate module, so that the basic kit can be sold with different engine sections), and then the helicopter hull was cut and trimmed down to match the original Bronco pod and to fit under the wing. This became more complicated than expected, because a) the AH-1 cockpit and the nose are considerably shorter than the OV-10s, b) the AH-1 fuselage is markedly taller than the Bronco’s and c) the engine section, which would end up in the area of the wing, features major recesses, making the surface very uneven – calling for massive PSR to even this out. PSR was also necessary to hide the openings for the Fujimi AH-1’s stub wings. Other issues: the front landing gear (and its well) had to be added, as well as the OV-10 wing stubs. Furthermore, the new cockpit pod’s rear section needed an aerodynamical end/fairing, but I found a leftover Academy OV-10 section from a build/kitbashing many moons ago. Perfect match!
All these challenges could be tackled, even though the AH-1 cockpit looks surprisingly stout and massive on the Bronco’s airframe - the result looks stockier than expected, but it works well for the "Gunship" theme. Lots of PSR went into the new central fuselage section, though, even before it was mated with the OV-10 wing and the rest of the model.
Once cockpit and wing were finally mated, the seams had to disappear under even more PSR and a spinal extension of the canopy had to be sculpted across the upper wing surface, which would meld with the pod’s tail in a (more or less) harmonious shape. Not an easy task, and the fairing was eventually sculpted with 2C putty, plus even more PSR… Looks quite homogenous, though.
After this massive body work, other hardware challenges appeared like small distractions. The landing gear was another major issue because the deeper AH-1 section lowered the ground clearance, also because of the chin turret. To counter this, I raised the OV-10’s main landing gear by ~2mm – not much, but it was enough to create a credible stance, together with the front landing gear transplant under the cockpit, which received an internal console to match the main landing gear’s length. Due to the chin turret and the shorter nose, the front wheel retracts backwards now. But this looks quite plausible, thanks to the additional space under the cockpit tub, which also made a belt feed for the gun’s ammunition supply believable.
To enhance the menacing look I gave the model a fixed refueling boom, made from 1mm steel wire and a receptor adapter sculpted with white glue. The latter stuff was also used add some antenna fairings around the hull. Some antennae, chaff dispensers and an IR decoy were taken from the Academy kit.
The ordnance came from various sources. The Sidewinders under the wing tips were taken from an Italeri F-16C/D kit, they look better than the missiles from the Academy Bronco kit. Their launch rails came from an Italeri Bae Hawk 200. The quadruple Hellfire launchers on the underwing hardpoints were left over from an Italeri AH-1W, and they are a perfect load for this aircraft and its role. The LAU-10 and -19 missile pods on the stub wings were taken from the OV-10 kit.
Painting and markings:
Finding a suitable and somewhat interesting – but still plausible – paint scheme was not easy. Taking the A-10 as benchmark, an overall light grey livery (with focus on low contrast against the sky as protection against ground fire) would have been a likely choice – and in fact the last operational American OV-10s were painted in this fashion. But in order to provide a different look I used the contemporary USAF V-22Bs and Special Operations MC-130s as benchmark, which typically carry a darker paint scheme consisting of FS 36118 (suitably “Gunship Gray” :D) from above, FS 36375 underneath, with a low, wavy waterline, plus low-viz markings. Not spectacular, but plausible – and very similar to the late r/w Colombian OV-10s.
The cockpit tub became Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231, Humbrol 140) and the landing gear white (Revell 301).
The model received an overall black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, to liven up the dull all-grey livery. The decals were gathered from various sources, and I settled for black USAF low-viz markings. The “stars and bars” come from a late USAF F-4, the “IP” tail code was tailored from F-16 markings and the shark mouth was taken from an Academy AH-64. Most stencils came from another Academy OV-10 sheet and some other sources.
Decals were also used to create the trim on the propeller blades and markings on the ordnance.
Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and some exhaust soot stains were added with graphite along the tail boom flanks.
A successful transplantation – but is this still a modified Bronco or already a kitbashing? The result looks quite plausible and menacing, even though the TOW Cobra front section appears relatively massive. But thanks to the bigger engines and extended wing tips the proportions still work. The large low-pressure tires look a bit goofy under the aircraft, but they are original. The grey livery works IMHO well, too – a more colorful or garish scheme would certainly have distracted from the modified technical basis.
"Hôtel de Michelin"
500mm x 500mm x 870mm
19.6" x 19.6" x 34.2"
styrene foam / wood clay /stone clay /copper line /epoxy putty/plastic /aluminium foil /dry flower/ Japanese ash
Available
All images copyright TOKYO GOOD IDEA Development Institute Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.
Category: Model Kit.
Name: Missile Frigate.
Scale: 1/1400 scale.
Origin: Crusher Joe.
Brand: Nitto/Takara.
Material: Styrene Plastic.
Release Date: 1983.
Condition: Unassembled.
This is a Model Kit collected by my BB.
More in My Collection Corner.
+++ 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 Hawker Typhoon was a British single-seat fighter-bomber, produced by Hawker Aircraft. It was intended to be a medium-high altitude interceptor, as a replacement for the Hawker Hurricane, but several design problems were encountered and it never completely satisfied this requirement.
Even before Hurricane production began in March 1937, Sydney Camm had embarked on designing its successor. Two preliminary designs were similar and were larger than the Hurricane. These later became known as the "N" and "R" (from the initial of the engine manufacturers), because they were designed for the newly developed Napier Sabre and Rolls-Royce Vulture engines respectively. Both engines used 24 cylinders and were designed for over 2,000 hp (1,500 kW); the difference between the two was primarily in the arrangement of the cylinders – an H-block in the Sabre and an X-block in the Vulture. Hawker submitted these preliminary designs in July 1937 but were advised to wait until a formal specification for a new fighter was issued.
In March 1938, Hawker received from the Air Ministry, Specification F.18/37 for a fighter which would be able to achieve at least 400 mph (640 km/h) at 15,000 feet (4,600 m) and specified a British engine with a two-speed supercharger. The armament fitted was to be twelve 0.303” Browning machine guns with 500 rounds per gun, with a provision for alternative combinations of weaponry. The basic design of the Typhoon was a combination of traditional Hawker construction, as used in the earlier Hawker Hurricane, and more modern construction techniques; the front fuselage structure, from the engine mountings to the rear of the cockpit, was made up of bolted and welded duralumin or steel tubes covered with skin panels, while the rear fuselage was a flush-riveted, semi-monocoque structure. The forward fuselage and cockpit skinning was made up of large, removable duralumin panels, allowing easy external access to the engine and engine accessories and most of the important hydraulic and electrical equipment.
The Typhoon’s service introduction in mid-1941 was plagued with problems and for several months the aircraft faced a doubtful future. When the Luftwaffe brought the new Focke-Wulf Fw 190 into service in 1941, the Typhoon was the only RAF fighter capable of catching it at low altitudes; as a result it secured a new role as a low-altitude interceptor.
By 1943, the RAF needed a ground attack fighter more than a "pure" fighter and the Typhoon was suited to the role (and less-suited to the pure fighter role than competing aircraft such as the Spitfire Mk IX). The powerful engine allowed the aircraft to carry a load of up to two 1,000 pounds (450 kg) bombs, equal to the light bombers of only a few years earlier. Furthermore, from early 1943 the wings were plumbed and adapted to carry cylindrical 45 imp gal (200 l; 54 US gal) drop tanks increasing the Typhoon's range from 690 miles (1,110 km) to up to 1,090 miles (1,750 km). This enabled Typhoons to range deep into France, the Netherlands and Belgium.
From September 1943, Typhoons were also armed with four "60 lb" RP-3 rockets under each wing. Although the rocket projectiles were inaccurate and took considerable skill to aim and allow for ballistic drop after firing, "the sheer firepower of just one Typhoon was equivalent to a destroyer's broadside".
By the end of 1943, eighteen rocket-equipped Typhoon squadrons formed the basis of the RAF Second Tactical Air Force (2nd TAF) ground attack arm in Europe. In theory, the rocket rails and bomb-racks were interchangeable; in practice, to simplify supply, some used the rockets only, while other squadrons were armed exclusively with bombs, what also allowed individual units to more finely hone their skills with their assigned weapons.
The Typhoon was initially exclusively operated in the European theatre of operations, but in 1944 it was clear that a dedicated variant might become useful for the RAF’s operations in South-East Asia. In the meantime, Hawker had also developed what was originally an improved Typhoon II, but the differences between it and the Mk I were so great that it was effectively a different aircraft, and it was renamed the Hawker Tempest. However, as a fallback option and as a stopgap filler for the SEAC, Hawker also developed the Typhoon Mk. IV, a tropicalized late Mk. I with a bubble canopy and powered by the new Bristol Centaurus radial engine that could better cope with high ambient temperatures than the original liquid-cooled Sabre engine. The Centaurus IV chosen for the Typhoon Mk. IV also offered slightly more power than the Sabre and the benefit of reduced vulnerability to small arms fire at low altitude, since the large and vulnerable chin cooler could be dispensed with.
3,518 Typhoons of all variants were eventually built, 201 of them late Mk. IVs, almost all by Gloster. Once the war in Europe was over Typhoons were quickly removed from front-line squadrons; by October 1945 the Typhoon was no longer in operational use, with many of the wartime Typhoon units such as 198 Squadron being either disbanded or renumbered.
The SEAC’s few operational Mk IVs soldiered on, however, were partly mothballed after 1945 and eventually in 1947 handed over or donated to regional nascent air forces after their countries’ independence like India, Pakistan or Burma, where they served as fighters and fighter bombers well into the Sixties.
The Burmese Air Force; initially only called “The military”, since there was no differentiation between the army’s nascent servies, was founded on 16 January 1947, while Burma (as Myanmar was known until 1989) was still under British rule. By 1948, the fleet of the new air force included 40 Airspeed Oxfords, 16 de Havilland Tiger Moths, four Austers, and eight Typhoon Mk. IVs as well as three Supermarine Spitfires transferred from the Royal Air Force and had a few hundred personnel.
The Mingaladon Air Base HQ, the main air base in the country, was formed on 16 June 1950. No.1 Squadron, Equipment Holding Unit and Air High Command - Burma Air Force, and the Flying Training School, were placed under the jurisdiction of the base. A few months later, on 18 December 1950, No. 2 Squadron was formed with nine Douglas Dakotas as a transport squadron. In 1953, the Advanced Flying Unit was formed under the Mingaladon Air Base with de Havilland Vampire T55s, and by the end of 1953 the Burmese Air Force had three main airbases, at Mingaladon, Hmawbi, and Meiktila, in central Burma.
In 1953, the Burmese Air Force bought 30 Supermarine Spitfires from Israel and 20 Supermarine Seafires as well as 22 more Typhoon Mk. IVs from the United Kingdom. In 1954 it bought 40 Percival Provost T-53s and 8 de Havilland Vampire Mark T55s from the United Kingdom and two years later, in 1956, the Burmese Air Force bought 10 Cessna 180 aircraft from the United States. The same year, 6 Kawasaki Bell 47Gs formed its first helicopter unit. The following year, the Burmese Air Force procured 21 Hawker Sea Fury aircraft from the United Kingdom and 9 de Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otters from Canada. In 1958, it procured 7 additional Kawasaki Bell 47Gs and 12 Vertol H-21 Shawnees from the United States. Five years later, No. 503 Squadron Group was formed with No. 51 Squadron (de Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otters and Cessna 180s) and No. 53 Squadron (Bell 47Gs, Kaman HH-43 Huskies, and Aérospatiale Alouettes) in Meiktila.
When the non-Burman ethnic groups pushed for autonomy or federalism, alongside having a weak civilian government at the center, the military leadership staged a coup d'état in 1962, and this was the only conflict in which the aging Burmese Typhoons became involved. On 2 March 1962, the military led by General Ne Win took control of Burma through a coup d'état, and the government had been under direct or indirect control by the military since then. Between 1962 and 1974, Myanmar was ruled by a revolutionary council headed by the general. Almost all aspects of society (business, media, production) were nationalized or brought under government control under the Burmese Way to Socialism, which combined Soviet-style nationalization and central planning, and also meant the end of operation of many aircraft of Western origin, including the last surviving Burmese Typhoons, which were probably retired by 1964. The last piston engine fighters in Burmese service, the Hawker Sea Furies, are believed to have been phased out in 1968.
General characteristics:
Crew: One
Length: 32 ft 6 in (9.93 m)
Wingspan: 41 ft 7 in (12.67 m)
Height: 15 ft 4 in (4.67 m)
Wing area: 279 sq ft (25.9 m²)
Airfoil: root: NACA 2219; tip: NACA 2213
Empty weight: 8,840 lb (4,010 kg)
Gross weight: 11,400 lb (5,171 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 13,250 lb (6,010 kg) with two 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
Powerplant:
1× Bristol Centaurus IV 18-cylinder air-cooled radial engine with 2,210 hp (1,648 kW) take-off
power, driving a 4-bladed Rotol constant-speed propeller
Performance:
Maximum speed: 412 mph (663 km/h, 358 kn) at 19,000 ft (5,800 m)
Stall speed: 88 mph (142 km/h, 76 kn)
Range: 510 mi (820 km, 440 nmi) with two 500 lb (230 kg) bombs;
690 mi (1,110 km) "clean";
1,090 mi (1,750 km) with two 45 imp gal (200 l; 54 US gal) drop tanks.[65]
Service ceiling: 35,200 ft (10,700 m)
Rate of climb: 2,740 ft/min (13.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 40.9 lb/sq ft (200 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.20 hp/lb (0.33 kW/kg)
Armament:
4× 20 mm (0.787 in) Hispano Mk II cannon in the outer wings with 200 rpg
Underwing hardpoints for 8× RP-3 unguided air-to-ground rockets,
or 2× 500 lb (230 kg) or 2× 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs or a pair of drop tanks
The kit and its assembly:
The Hawker Typhoon is IMHO an overlooked WWII aircraft, and it’s also “underwiffed”. I have actually built no single Typhoon in my 45 years of model kit building - time to change that!
Inspiration was a lot of buzz in the model kit builder community after KP’s launch of several Hawker Tempest kits, with all major variants including the Sabre- and Centaurus-powered types. While the Tempest quickly outpaced the Typhoon in real life and took the glory, I wondered about a Centaurus-powered version for the SEA theatre of operations – similar to the Tempest Mk. II, which just came too late to become involved in the conflict against the Japanese forces. A similar Typhoon variant could have arrived a couple of months earlier, though.
Technically, this conversion is just an Academy Hawker Typhoon Mk Ib (a late variant without the “car door”, a strutless bubble canopy and a four-blade propeller) mated with the optional Centaurus front end from a Matchbox Hawker Tempest. Sounds simple, but there are subtle dimensional differences between the types/kits, and the wing roots of the Matchbox kit differ from the Academy kit, so that the engine/fuselage intersection as well as the wing roots called for some tailoring and PSR. However, the result of this transplantation stunt looked better and more natural than expected! Since I did not want to add extra fairings for air carburetor and oil cooler to the Wings (as on the Tempest), I gave the new creation a generous single fairing for both under the nose – the space between the wide landing gear wells offered a perfect location, and I used a former Spitfire radiator as donor part. The rest, including the unguided missiles under the wings was ordnance, was taken OOB, and the propeller (from the Academy kit) received an adapter consisting of styrene tubes to match it with the Matchbox kit’s engine and its opening for the propeller axis.
Painting and markings:
This was initially a challenge since the early Burmese aircraft were apparently kept in bare metal or painted in silver overall. This would certainly have looked interesting on a Typhoon, too – but then I found a picture of a Spitfire (UB 421) at Myanmar's Air Force Museum at Naypyidaw, which carries camouflage – I doubt that it is authentic, though, at least the colors, which markedly differ from RAF Dark Green/Dark Earth and the bright blue undersides also look rather fishy. But it was this paint scheme that I adapted for my Burmese Typhoon with Modelmaster 2027 (FS 34096, B-52 Dark Green, a rather greyish and light tone) and 2107 (French WWII Chestnut, a reddish, rich chocolate brown tone) from above and Humbrol 145 (FS 35237, USN Gray Blue) below – a less garish tone.
As usual, the model received a black ink washing and post-panel-shading for dramatic effect; the cockpit interior became very dark grey (Revell 06 Anthracite) while the landing gear became Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165), as a reminder of the former operator of the aircraft and its painting standards. The red spinner as well as the red-and-white-checkered rudder were inspired by Burmese Hawker Sea Furies, a nice contrast to the camouflage. It's also a decal, from a tabletop miniatures accessory sheet. This contrast was furthermore underlined through the bright and colorful national markings, which come from a Carpena decal sheet for exotic Spitfires, just the tactical code was changed.
After some signs of wear with dry-brushed silver and some graphite soot stains around the exhausts and the guns the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Voilà, a whiffy Hawker Typhoon – and it looks better than expected. Not only does the brawny Centaurus look good on the rather burly Typhoon, the transplantation worked out better than expected, too. However, with the radial engine the Typhoon looks even more like an Fw 190 on steroids?
The Fujifilm X-H1 is my latest purchase. It's pretty fast, quiet, and light. I like it. I don't like it as well as the SL, but it seems to be a pretty well-implemented bit of technology.
This image was captured by a Fujifilm GFX-50s on Cambo Actus GFX. The lens was a Sinaron 105/4 Digital in DAB board.
I've essayed a few things I like and dislike about both cameras here: ohm-image.net/opinion/photophile/2018/3/7/enter-fujifilm-...
Strobist:
3x Profoto D1 lights, object above, object left behind the camera, object obliquely right. The top one was at 5/10 power behind two layers of styrene, the two on the side at 1/3 power and behind styrene.
Type: Trading figures.
Brand: Wing Mau.
Name: Aquatic Museum Crabs.
Series: Aquatic Museum.
Scale/Size: Non scale.
Material: Styrene plastic.
Release Date: Many years ago.
*Note: Pics not by us. It's just for reference.
These are trading figures collected by my BB or me.
More in My Collection Corner.
Fujifilm's X-T1 with the XF Fujinon 35/1,4 R lens attached. This image was taken as part of Ω image's quick review of the X-T1.
It was taken with the Sony ILCE-A7r and the Nikkor PC 85/2,8 ED Mikcro lens.
Strobist: rear trigger strobe into black card for a fast and soft fall off on the right side of the camera. Two large strobes were placed camera left and right and shot into styrene reflectors.
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the full-up VF-1 prototype (VF-X-1).
The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.
The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.
The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie, FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S for additional firepower. The FAST Pack system was designed to enhance the VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter, and the initial V1.0 came in the form of conformal pallets that could be attached to the fighter’s leg flanks for additional fuel – primarily for Long Range Interdiction tasks in atmospheric environment. Later FAST Packs were designed for space operations.
After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.
The versatile aircraft underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 onwards, placed in a streamlined fairing in front of the cockpit. This system allowed for long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his position with active radar emissions, and it could also be used for target illumination and guiding precision weapons.
Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with sensor arrays, depending on the systems, mounted on the wing-tips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures were also added to some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.
The U.N.S. Marine Corps, which evolved from the United States Marine Corps after the national service was transferred to the global U.N. Spacy command in 2008, was a late adopter of the VF-1, because the Valkyries’ as well as the Destroids’ potential for landing operations was underestimated. But especially the VF-1’s versatility and VTOL capabilities made it a perfect candidate as a replacement for the service’s AV-8B Harrier II and AH-1 Cobra fleet in the close air support (CAS) and interdiction role. The first VF-1s were taken into service in January 2010 by SVMF-49 “Vikings” at Miramar Air Base in California/USA, and other units followed soon, immediately joining the battle against the Zentraedi forces.
The UNSMC’s VF-1s were almost identical to the standard Valkyries, but they had from the start additional hardpoints for light loads like sensor pods added to their upper legs, on the lower corners of the air intake ducts. These were intended to carry FLIR, laser target designators (for respective guided smart weapons) or ECM pods, while freeing the swiveling underwing hardpoints to offensive ordnance.
Insisting on their independent heritage, the UNSMC’s Valkyries were never repainted in the U.N. Spacy’s standard tan and white livery. They either received a unique two tone low visibility gray paint scheme (the fighter units) or retained paint schemes that were typical for their former units, including some all-field green machines or VF-1s in a disruptive wraparound livery in grey, green and black.
Beyond A and J single-seaters (the UNSMC did not receive the premium S variant), a handful of VF-1D two-seaters were upgraded to the UNSMC’s specification and very effectively operated in the FAC (Forward Air Control) role, guiding both long-range artillery as well as attack aircraft against enemy positions.
The UNSMC’s VF-1s suffered heavy losses, though – for instance, SVMF-49 was completely wiped out during the so-called “Zentraedi Rain of Death” in April 2011, when the Zentraedi Imperial Grand Fleet, consisting of nearly five million warships, appeared in orbit around the Earth. Commanded by Dolza, Supreme Commander of the Zentraedi, they were ordered to incinerate the planet's surface, which they did. 70% of the Earth was utterly destroyed, according to the staff at Alaska Base. Dolza initially believed this to be total victory, until a massive energy pulse began to form on the Earth's surface. This was the Grand Cannon, a weapon of incredible destructive power that the Zentraedi were unaware of, and it disintegrated a good deal of the armada that was hanging over the Northern Hemisphere. While the Zentraedi were successful in rendering the weapon inoperable before it could fire a second time, the SDF-1 began a counterattack of its own alongside the renegade Imperial-Class Fleet and Seventh Mechanized Space Division, which destroyed the Imperial Grand Fleet. After this event, though, the UNSMC as well as other still independent services like the U.N. Navy were dissolved and the respective units integrated into the all-encompassing U.N. Spacy.
The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68)
However, the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!
General characteristics:
All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,
used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force and U.N.S. Marine Corps
Accommodation:
Pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat
Dimensions:
Fighter Mode:
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)
Height 3.84 meters
Battroid Mode:
Height 12.68 meters
Width 7.3 meters
Length 4.0 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons;
MTOW: 37.0 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or 225.63 kN in overboost
4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip)
18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles
Performance:
Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h
Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87
g limit: in space +7
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Design Features:
3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system
Transformation:
Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.
Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.
Armament:
2x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 pulses per minute
1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min
4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including…
12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or
12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or
6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or
4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,
or a combination of above load-outs
2x auxiliary hardpoints on the legs for light loads like a FLIR sensor, laser rangefinder/
target designator or ECM pod (typically not used for offensive ordnance)
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional VF-1 was born from spontaneous inspiration and the question if the USMC could have adopted the Valkyrie within the Macross time frame and applied its rather special grey/green/black paint scheme from the Nineties that was carried by AH-1s, CH-46s and also some OV-10s.
The model is a simple, vintage ARII VF-1 in Fighter mode, in this case a VF-1D two-seater that received the cockpit section and the head unit from a VF-1J Gerwalk model to create a single seater. While the parts are interchangeable, the Gerwalk and the Fighter kit have different molds for the cockpit sections and the canopies, too. This is mostly evident through the lack of a front landing gear well under the Gerwalk's cockpit - I had to "carve" a suitable opening into the bottom of the nose, but that was not a problem.
The kit was otherwiese built OOB, with the landing gear down and (finally, after the scenic flight pictures) with an open canopy for final display among the rest of my VF-1 fleet. However, I added some non-canonical small details like small hardpoints on the upper legs and the FLIR and targeting pods on them, scratched from styrene bits.
The ordnance was changed from twelve AMM-1 missiles under the wings to something better suited for attack missions. Finding suitable material became quite a challenge, though. I eventually settled on a pair of large laser-guided smart bombs and two pairs of small air-to-ground missile clusters. The LGBs are streamlined 1:72 2.000 lb general purpose bombs, IIRC from a Hobby Boss F-5E kit, and the launch tubes were scratched from a pair of Bazooka starters from an Academy 1:72 P-51 kit. The ventral standard GU-11 pod was retained and modified to hold a scratched wire display for in-flight pictures at its rear end.
Some blade antennae were added around the hull as a standard measure to improve the simple kit’s look. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just added a pilot figure for the scenic shots and the thick canopy was later mounted on a small lift arm in open position.
Painting and markings:
Adapting the characteristic USMC three-tone paint scheme for the VF-1 was not easy; I used the symmetric pattern from the AH-1s as starting point for the fuselage and gradually evolved it onto the wings into an asymmetric free-form pattern, making sure that the areas where low-viz roundels and some vital stencils would sit on grey for good contrast and readability. The tones became authentic: USMC Field Green (FS 34095, Humbrol 105), USN Medium Grey (FS 35237, Humbrol 145) and black (using Revell 06 Tar Black, which is a very dark grey and not pure black). For some contrast the wings' leading edges were painted with a sand brown/yellow (Humbrol 94).
The landing gear became standard white (Revell 301), the cockpit interior medium grey (Revell 47) with a black ejection seat with brown cushions, and the air intakes as well as the interior of the VG wings dark grey (Revell 77). To set the camouflaged nose radome apart I gave it a slightly different shade of green. The GU-11 pod became bare metal (Revell 91). The LGBs were painted olive drab overall while the AGMs became light grey.
Roundels as well as the UNSMC and unit tags were printed at home in black on clear decal sheet. The unit markings came from an Academy OV-10. The modex came from an 1:72 Revell F8F sheet. Stencils becvame eitrher black or white to keep the low-viz look, just a few tiny color highlights bereak the camouflage up. Some of the characteristic vernier thrusters around the hull are also self-made decals.
Finally, after some typical details and position lights were added with clear paint over a silver base, the small VF-1 was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish.
A spontaneous interim project - and the UMSC's three-tone paint scheme suits the VF-1 well, which might have been a very suitable aircraft for this service and its mission profiles. I am still a bit uncertain about the camouflage's effectiveness, though - yes, it's disruptive, but the color contrasts are so high that a hiding effect seems very poor, even though I find that the scheme works well over urban terrain? It's fictional, though, and even though there are canonical U.N.S. Marines VF-1s to be found in literature, none I came across so far carried this type of livery.
Captain's Log,
Stardate 4238.7,
We have begun our scans of the nearby star system and they are showing an unusually high concentration of the polymer Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene on one of the planets. I am sending a shuttlecraft for a closer inspection...
Yup, She's over 100 studs. I was very bored with where my original SHIP was going and the idea for this beauty just seemed too good to pass up.
Also, another sneak peak at Old Ironsides!
I added strips of styrene to the back of the front facade piece to keep it flush. I am going to add a couple of more later tonight.
This is excess extruded Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) from a LEGO factory. The ABS pellets were heated in preparation for injection molding, but the liquid plastic was ejected from the machine before it could be injected into the mold. This is common when troubleshooting molds, and the waste plastic is typically discarded or sent for recycling at another company. Despite its fluid look, this ABS has cooled to about the typical hardness that you'd expect from LEGO bricks.
Shell Oil Company
59’5” 31,780gal Styrene Tank Car (DOT Class 111A100W1)
SCMX 6460
Blt. Trinity Rail (TRN), 02/14 (SCMX 6000-6519)
MP15 (CN York Sub), Markham, Ontario, Canada
May 9th, 2018
1600 x 1050
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
In 1942, Albert Speer placed an order for a howitzer mounted on a tank chassis to keep up with the Panzer Divisions. Alkett received the order to design the new vehicle, which would be known as the Sd.Kfz.166, Sturmpanzer, or Sturmpanzer 43. Although commonly referred to as the Brummbär, this was the nickname given to the Sturmpanzer 43 by Allied intelligence, not by the Germans. They referred to it casually as the “Stupa 43”.
The chassis was the one of the reliable mass-produced Panzer IV. Above it, Alkett fitted a massive 15 cm (5.9 in) Sturmhaubitze (StuH) 43 L/12 developed by Škoda, which had common ammunition with the standard siG 33 howitzer in German service. The howitzer was protected by a casemate with sloped sides and thick armor plates. The first production vehicles proved their superstructure was way too heavy for the chassis, and experienced breakdowns of suspension elements or the transmission. The second series corrected this issue with a newly shaped, lighter casemate. The decision was taken in October 1943 and after the redesign, 800 kg (1,800 lb) of steel were spared, including from the gun mount itself on the third series. This new series was named StuH 43/1. Also, the Zimmerit anti-magnetic coating was factory-applied until September 1944. All in all, around 300 were built and primarily saw service in 4 dedicated battalions, the Sturmpanzer-Abteilungen (Stu.Pz.Abt.) 216 - 219.
By that time, the limits of the Sd.Kfz.166 had become apparent and constant losses required new or at least more vehicles of this type. To fill these gaps and provide the assault gun carrier with improved mobility and protection, a successor on the basis of the then-state-of-the-art German medium battle tank Sd.Kfz. 171 Panzer V ‘Panther’ was conceived. The Panther had been born out of the shock of combat on the Eastern Front during the 1941 Operation Barbarossa. There, German units first met the T-34 and KV-1 tanks which posed significant problems to the German tank and anti-tank cannons. The use of sloped armor kept the weight of the tank down but maintained its protection level. Panther tanks first saw action on the Eastern fronts, but they were subsequently also used in Italy, France, Belgium and Holland. The tank had better cross-country mobility than the heavy Tiger and had the same if not more hitting power, with its 7.5 cm Kw.K 42 L/70 long barreled high velocity anti-tank gun. Around 6,000 were produced.
By early 1944 a dedicated anti-tank SPG on the Panther’s basis had been developed, too, the Panzerjäger V Panther, also known as “Jagdpanther”, even though its official designation was “Sd.Kfz. 173 8.8 cm (3.46 in) Pak 43/3 auf Panzerjäger Panther”. It was based on the upgraded Panther Ausf. G that had just entered production. This type was earmarked to be converted into a Sturmpanzer, too, but it became soon clear that the 15 cm Sturmhaubitze (StuH) 43 required a different mount than the Pak 43, placed further forward in the casemate to accept the weapon’s stronger recoil and leave enough room for the crew to properly handle the bigger and heavier rounds. While the Panther chassis was retained, the superstructure had to be modified accordingly. As a consequence the “Stumpanther” became an almost independent development from the Jagdpanther, even though it was still regarded as a variant of the latter with the designation Sd.Kfz. 173/2.
The Sturmpanther was produced in two batches, called “Serie 1” and “Serie 2”. The initial production run was based on converted Sd.Kfz. 171 battle tanks, which were typically recovered damaged battle tanks and re-built at Alkett as Sd.Kfz. 173/2s. The tanks lost their turrets and the respective area in front of the engine bay, creating a spacious combat section with the weapon and its crew but also with the driver and a radio operator station (which was occupied by a 2nd gunner who also operated a defensive machine gun in the front, too). Above the chassis’ waterline, a new boxy casemate was added that protected the front section. Viewed from the front, the casemate had a trapezoidal shape with flat walls. While these plates were thick, they were also slightly sloped to provide additional protection. Unlike the Jagdpanther’s construction, the Sd.Kfz. 173/2’s superstructure was not welded to the hull but was instead held in place by bolts, what made it possible to lift the whole casemate away and easily mount/replace the main gun or work on the drivetrain.
To the rear part of each side armor plate, a cone-shaped pistol port was placed. These were actually conical plugs that were connected to chains: When in use, the armored cover would simply be pushed out by one of the crew members. Once open, these would just hang on to the chains and could be closed back by dragging the chain back in. In the middle of the casemate’s rear wall above the engine deck, a large two-door hatch was located, and two additional pistol ports with plugs were placed on both sides of this door. The front plate had a round-shaped opening in the middle for the gun ball mount, which was further protected by a sloped cast deflector mantlet against direct frontal attacks.
The casemate’s top was flat but slightly angled down (4°) toward the front. An arc-shaped armored cover protected the gunner’s periscope. To the right of it, initially only a square-shaped two-piece hatch for the commander with a periscope was located, but this was soon replaced or retrofitted with a shallow command cupola. Further back, on the left side, the loader’s round-shaped two-part hatch was located. In the back corners, two round-shaped ports were used by the two loaders to see the surrounding rear hemisphere with periscopes. In the middle, a ventilation port with protective sides was installed.
The Sturmpanther’s frontal lower armor remained at the Panzer V’s standard 55°-angled 80 mm, while the steeper casemate front plate (just 20° angle) had a thickness of 100 mm to provide comparable protection. However, the seam between hull and casemate was a weak point. The casemate’s side walls were 60 mm thick and placed at a 30° angle, flush with the hull’s side walls. The rear armor was the same armor thickness placed at a 20° angle. The top was much lighter, at only 30 mm.
In the field, especially the frontal armor was augmented with equipment like spare track links, and additional steel plates of 30 mm were frequently bolted onto the front and/or the sides of the casemate – but this added weight, shifted the center of gravity forward, and it reduced the vehicle’s performance and handling, too. Additionally, protective skirt armor made from 4 mm face-hardened steel plates could be added to protect the visible 40 mm chassis side armor visible between the top of the track and below the pannier. It was believed this area would be vulnerable to penetration at close range by Soviet anti-tank rifles, but these items were rarely mounted and were also easily lost in the heat of battle.
For the use in the Sturmpanther, the StuH 43 was modified further and received a longer barrel for more firepower and versatility: the original short L/12 barrel (only 180 cm/ 6 feet) was replaced with a new L/24 barrel, and the gun received a hydro-pneumatic recoil damper to compensate the higher recoil forces. The longer barrel resulted in a considerably higher muzzle velocity and therefore in a longer firing range. The so-called StuH 43/2 had a maximum range of 14.500 m (15,900 yd) when firing a standard I Gr 33 HE round (which weighed 38 kilograms / 84 lb), which now achieved a muzzle velocity of 880 m/sec. (2,887 ft/s), almost three times as fast as the former short-barreled variants of the gun.
The vehicle could fire 1-2 rounds per minute, but the biggest letdown for the Sturmpanther was its limited ammunition capacity: It only had internal space for 20 shells, usually 13 HE and 7 Concrete- or Armor-Piercing, so that many crews stowed more rounds externally on the rear deck, too, sometimes in sophisticated transport racks that were welded to the hull. Smoke rounds were available, too, but only carried/fired when the tactical situation required them. It took up to 40 minutes to resupply ammunition and it needed a very strong loader, as each shell weighed around 40 kg. This would strongly affect combat capabilities, especially if supply lines were bogged down, or if an offensive lasted too long, meaning that the tank would run out of munitions far too quickly. But an experienced crew would make the best use of its limited ammunition and fare well.
Twenty-two “Serie 1” vehicles were converted in this fashion, and they differed from each other in many details as they were based on a mix of already existing variants of the Panzer V. When a dedicated production line was eventually established, “Serie 2” Sd.Kfz. 173/2s were built in a more standardized fashion, using Panther Ausf. G hull and elements from the Jagdpanther production (which had priority). More than sixty Sd.Kfz. 173/2s were newly built this way, and an interspersed “Serie 3” was technically the same as the Serie 2, but were, due to the lack of StuH 43/2 howitzers, only outfitted with a 10.5 cm Leichte Feldhaubitze 18 L28 with 44 rounds. These vehicles received the separate designation Sd.Kfz. 173/3 and were primarily used in urban combat against fortifications, strongholds and bunkers; less than thirty were built.
Exact production numbers are uncertain, but when Sturmpanther production ceased in mid-1945 in favor of the new Einheitspanzer tank series, a little less than one hundred of all variants had been built and delivered. At least one Sd.Kfz. 173/2 was in early 1945 tested with a 38 cm Sturmmörser RW 61 (the same weapon as used on the “Sturmmörserwagen 606/4”, the Sturmtiger), but it was found that the Sturmpanther’s chassis was not strong enough for the heavy weapon, so that the E-75 chassis was chosen instead for the Sturmtiger’s successor.
Being based on the Panzer V, the Sturmpanther was reliable mechanically and even more agile than the regular Panther, thanks to its lower center of gravity. The first vehicles arrived at the front lines in summer 1944 at the Western front and were immediately thrown into action. The Sturmpanther initially tended to be used for direct fire as an assault gun, which saw it fighting against enemy positions, but not necessarily enemy tanks. However, even though rather designed as a bunker breaker, the Sturmpanther was more and more employed as a Jagdpanzer against enemy tanks and turned out to be quite effective in this role. Whilst the weight of the shells resulted in a slow rate of fire and lacked penetration power, the sheer mechanical shock of a hit was enough to kill the crew of an enemy tank or disable it. It was reported that the Sturmpanther’s HE shell could totally blow the turret off of a heavy tank like a Soviet KV-1 or at least jam it, and the blast could turn over a medium tank like an M4 Sherman or T-34 and totally disable it.
AP shells for direct attacks were available, but these large-caliber rounds were expensive, hard to make, and were in very short supply, as well as only being a little more effective than the HE round.
Many Sturmpanther were outfitted in field workshops with launch racks for unguided rockets like the 15 cm Nebelwerfer 41 or 21 cm Nebelwerfer 42 (four to six) were mounted on top of the engine deck, firing forward over the casemate. 8 cm Raketen-Vielfachwerfer (a copy of the Soviet BM-8 “Katyusha” multiple rocket launcher) were occasionally used in this fashion, too, with one or two 12-rocket-racks mounted above each other. These weapons had a range of up to 7 km (4½ ml), gave the Sturmpanther crew more tactical options and stretched the short internal shell supply.
Like the Sturmpanzer 43 before, the Sturmpanther was concentrated in dedicated Sturmpanzer-Abteilungen, but the type’s limited number only made it operational in single companies within three battalions, including the newly founded Sturm-Panzer-Abteilung 220 that exclusively operated the Sturmpanther. The Sturmpanther was heavily used during the “Battle at the Bulge” and also saw extensive action in Southern Germany, Austria and Hungary.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander, gunner, 2x loader, driver)
Weight: 45.5 t (44.8 long tons; 50.2 short tons)
Length: 8.46 m (27 ft 8½ in) overall
6.87 m (22 ft 6 in) hull only
Width: 3.42 m (11 ft 3 in)
Height: 2.66 m (8 ft 8¾ in)
Ground clearance: 54 cm (21¼ in)
Suspension: Double torsion bar, interleaved road wheels
Fuel capacity: 720 litres (160 imp gal; 190 US gal)
Armor:
15–100 mm (0.6 – 3.93 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 46 km/h (29 mph)
Operational range: 260 km (160 mi) on road
130 km (81 mi) cross-country
Power/weight: 15.38 PS (11.5 kW)/tonne (13.77 hp/ton)
Engine:
Maybach HL230 P30 V-12 23.800 cm³ petrol engine with 700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW)
ZF AK 7-200 gear; 7 forward 1 reverse
Armament:
1× 150 mm (5.9 in) StuH 43/2 L/24 howitzer with 20 rounds
1× 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun in the front glacis plate with 800 rounds
The kit and its assembly:
This build was inspired by leftover parts from other projects, including a complete casemate from a Trumpeter 1:72 Elefant and the gun barrel from a Trumpeter 1:72 KV-2. This made me wonder about a German Sturmpanzer, a successor for the Panzer IV-based Brummbär with its short 15 cm howitzer. At first, I considered a Tiger I chassis (got one left in The Stash™) but found that it would resemble too much the real-world Sturmtiger with its 38cm rocket mortar. A medium Panther chassis appeared like a better and more plausible option. The real world Jagdpanther would have been a similar SPG development, so I settled upon a Panther basis, in this case a Hasegawa 1:72 Panther Ausf. G.
The Hasegawa Panther is a simple and by today’s standards almost primitive affair, but it goes together well and can be easily modified. Hull and running gear were taken OOB, including the original rubber-rimmed wheels and parts of the protective side skirts. Mounting the Elefant’s casemate onto the turret-less hull took some effort, though. First, it had to be modified to match the Panther’s front section, and it was tailored down accordingly in height, until width and length matched the hull. A double door from a Jagdtiger was glued to the casemate’s back side, as the original round opening fell victim to the trimming-down measures. As a lucky coincidence, the casemate would fit well between the front glacis plate and the engine deck, resulting in a very Jagdpanther-esque look, and the longer barrel reminds of the Soviet ISU-152 SPG?
Integrating the gun mantlet and the bigger barrel into the new kinked front was a bit tricky, though. To fill the hole in the Elefant’s casemate front plate I used the ball mount from the same kit and fixed it into position with a sturdy styrene tube from behind, so that it would still be movable. The Elefant’s front cover was missing, though, so that I had to improvise from this point on. I found a gun port from a Jagdpanther and totally disassembled it, using it to cover the ball mount from the outside and to frame the narrower opening on the model.
The ball mount had to be further protected with a mantlet, and I used a relatively narrow piece from a Schmalturm (IIRC from a Hasegawa 1:72 Panther Ausf. F), which was glued between the KV-2 barrel and the Elefant’s trimmed-down ball mount. A Frankenstein creation that looks surprisingly natural!
Some small details like sight slits, plug covers and bolts on the casemate were added, and I transplanted a shell rack from the 1:72 Trumpeter KV-2 onto the engine deck, with some additional supports and struts (styrene profile material). I first thought that this was a launch rack for unguided missiles, but due to its fixed in position I rather assume that it is “only” a storage rack for additional howitzer rounds. Still plausible, though, and it adds an interesting detail to the model.
Painting and markings:
Another iteration of the standard Hinterhalt paint scheme, in this case only a two-tone variation with wide stripes in Rotbraun (RAL 8017, Humbrol 160) over a Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028, Tamiya TS-3 from a rattle can as overall primer) base. The model received an overall watercolor washing with black and burnt umbra, as well as dry-brushing with grey and beige. Rust and dirt residues were created with watercolors (burnt sienna, umbra). The black vinyl tracks were painted with watercolors, too, with a mix of grey, ochre and burnt umber.
The tactical code’s color and arrangement are unusual, but this style with the code numbers in a contrasting tone and separated by the national marking was for instance used by the Schwere Pz.Abt.506 (operating Tiger IIs) in early 1945. The Mickey Mouse decoration comes from a Luftwaffe aircraft, as well as the small tank “kill markings” on the barrel; both came from a generic TL Modellbau sheet.
The finished model received an overall coat with matt acrylic varnish, was then assembled (running gear and tracks), and the lower areas were lightly dusted with artist mineral pigments.
A cool model, and this fictional assault gun carrier on the basis of a Panther chassis looks very natural – it reminds a lot of the Jagdpanther, but there are many subtle differences that only become apparent with a second, closer look. I like that. The paint scheme in just two tones also looks better than expected, I expected it to look quite dull. But the tiger stripes are quite disruptive, altogether a pretty subtle whif vehicle.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
The A-14 program originally started in 2005 as a private venture, initiated by Northrop-Grumman together with the Elbit Group as a joint venture through Elbit’s Texas-based aircraft division M7 Aerosystems, an approved supplier to major aerospace clients. The aircraft was intended to replace the USAF’s A-10 attack aircraft as well as early F-16s in the strike role from 2010 onwards. The time slot for the project turned out to be advantageous, because at that time the USAF was contemplating to replace the simple and sturdy A-10 with the much more complex F-35, eventually even with its VTOL variant, and the highly specialized F-117 was retired, too.
The A-14 revived conceptual elements of Grumman’s stillborn A-12 stealth program for the US Navy, which had also been part of the USAF’s plans to replace the supersonic F-111 tactical bomber, but on a less ambitious and expensive level concerning technology, aiming for a more effective compromise between complexity, survivability and costs. The basic idea was an updated LTV A-7D (the A-10’s predecessor from the Vietnam War era), which had far more sophisticated sensor and navigation equipment than the rather simple but sturdy A-10, but with pragmatic stealth features and a high level of survivability in a modern frontline theatre or operations.
M7 Aerosystems started on a blank sheet, even though Northrop-Grumman’s A-12 influence was clearly visible, and to a certain degree the aircraft shared the basic layout with the F-117A. The A-14 was tailored from the start to the ground attack role, and therefore a subsonic design. Measures to reduce radar cross-section included airframe shaping such as alignment of edges, fixed-geometry serpentine inlets that prevented line-of-sight of the engine faces from any exterior view, use of radar-absorbent material (RAM), and attention to detail such as hinges and maintenance covers that could provide a radar return. The A-14 was furthermore designed to have decreased radio emissions, infrared signature and acoustic signature as well as reduced visibility to the naked eye.
The resulting airframe was surprisingly large for an attack aircraft – in fact, it rather reminded of a tactical bomber in the F-111/Su-24 class than an alternative to the A-10. The A-14 consisted of a rhomboid-shaped BWB (blended-wing-and-body) with extended wing tips and only a moderate (35°) wing sweep, cambered leading edges, a jagged trailing edge and a protruding cockpit section which extended forward of the main body.
The majority of the A-14’s structure and surface were made out of a carbon-graphite composite material that is stronger than steel, lighter than aluminum, and absorbs a significant amount of radar energy. The central fuselage bulge ended in a short tail stinger with a pair of swept, canted fins as a butterfly tail, which also shrouded the engine’s hot efflux. The fins could have been omitted, thanks to the aerodynamically unstable aircraft’s fly-by-wire steering system, and they effectively increased the A-14’s radar signature as well as its visual profile, but the gain in safety in case of FBW failure or physical damage was regarded as a worthwhile trade-off. Due to its distinctive shape and profile, the A-14 quickly received the unofficial nickname “Squatina”, after the angel shark family.
The spacious and armored cockpit offered room for the crew of two (pilot and WSO or observer for FAC duties), seated side-by-side under a generous glazing, with a very good field of view forward and to the sides. The fuselage structure was constructed around a powerful cannon, the five-barrel GAU-12/U 25 mm ‘Equalizer’ gun, which was, compared with the A-10’s large GAU-8/A, overall much lighter and more compact, but with only little less firepower. It fired a new NATO series of 25 mm ammunition at up to 4.200 RPM. The gun itself was located under the cockpit tub, slightly set off to port side, and the front wheel well was offset to starboard to compensate, similar in arrangement to the A-10 or Su-25. The gun’s ammunition drum and a closed feeding belt system were located behind the cockpit in the aircraft’s center of gravity. An in-flight refueling receptor (for the USAF’s boom system) was located in the aircraft’s spine behind the cockpit, normally hidden under a flush cover.
Due to the gun installation in the fuselage, however, no single large weapon bay to minimize radar cross section and drag through external ordnance was incorporated, since this feature would have increased airframe size and overall weight. Instead, the A-14 received four, fully enclosed compartments between the wide main landing gear wells and legs. The bays could hold single iron bombs of up to 2.000 lb caliber each, up to four 500 lb bombs or CBUs, single laser-guided GBU-14 glide bombs, AGM-154 JSOW or GBU-31/38 JDAM glide bombs, AGM-65 Maverick guided missiles or B61 Mod 11 tactical nuclear weapons, as well as the B61 Mod 12 standoff variant, under development at that time). Retractable launch racks for defensive AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles were available, too, and additional external pylons could be added, e.g. for oversize ordnance like AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) or AGM-158 Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), or drop tanks for ferry flights. The total in- and external ordnance load was 15,000 lb (6,800 kg).
The A-14 was designed with superior maneuverability at low speeds and altitude in mind and therefore featured a large wing area, with high wing aspect ratio on the outer wing sections, and large ailerons areas. The ailerons were placed at the far ends of the wings for greater rolling moment and were split, making them decelerons, so that they could also be used as air brakes in flight and upon landing.
This wing configuration promoted short takeoffs and landings, permitting operations from primitive forward airfields near front lines. The sturdy landing gear with low-pressure tires supported these tactics, and a retractable arrester hook, hidden by a flush cover under the tail sting, made it possible to use mobile arrested-recovery systems.
The leading edge of the wing had a honeycomb structure panel construction, providing strength with minimal weight; similar panels covered the flap shrouds, elevators, rudders and sections of the fins. The skin panels were integral with the stringers and were fabricated using computer-controlled machining, reducing production time and cost, and this construction made the panels more resistant to damage. The skin was not load-bearing, so damaged skin sections could be easily replaced in the field, with makeshift materials if necessary.
Power came from a pair of F412-GE-114 non-afterburning turbofans, engines that were originally developed for the A-12, but de-navalized and lightened for the A-14. These new engines had an output of 12,000 lbf (53 kN) each and were buried in blended fairings above the wing roots, with jagged intakes and hidden ducts. Flat exhausts on the wings’ upper surface minimized both radar and IR signatures.
Thanks to the generous internal fuel capacity in the wings and the fuselage, the A-14 was able to loiter and operate under 1,000 ft (300 m) ceilings for extended periods. It typically flew at a relatively low speed of 300 knots (350 mph; 560 km/h), which made it a better platform for the ground-attack role than fast fighter-bombers, which often have difficulty targeting small, slow-moving targets or executing more than just a single attack run on a selected target.
A mock-up was presented and tested in the wind tunnel and for radar cross-section in late 2008. The A-14’s exact radar cross-section (RCS) remained classified, but in 2009 M7 Aerosystems released information indicating it had an RCS (from certain angles) of −40 dBsm, equivalent to the radar reflection of a "steel marble". With this positive outcome and the effective design, M7 Aerosystems eventually received federal funding for the production of prototypes for an official DT&E (Demonstration Testing and Evaluation) program.
Three prototypes/pre-production aircraft were built in the course of 2010 and 2011, and the first YA-14 made its maiden flight on 10 May 2011. The DT&E started immediately, and the machines (a total of three flying prototypes were completed, plus two additional airframes for static tests) were gradually outfitted with mission avionics and other equipment. This included GPS positioning, an inertial navigation system, passive sensors to detect radar usage, a small, gyroscopically stabilized turret, mounted under the nose of the aircraft, containing a FLIR boresighted with a laser spot-tracker/designator, and an experimental 3-D laser scanning LIDAR in the nose as a radiation-less alternative to a navigation and tracking radar.
Soon after the DT&E program gained momentum in 2012, the situation changed for M7 Aerosystems when the US Air Force considered the F-35B STOVL variant as its favored replacement CAS aircraft, but concluded that the aircraft could not generate a sufficient number of sorties. However, the F-35 was established as the A-14’s primary rival and remained on the USAF’s agenda. For instance, at that time the USAF proposed disbanding five A-10 squadrons in its budget request to cut its fleet of 348 A-10s by 102 to lessen cuts to multi-mission aircraft in service that could replace the specialized attack aircraft.
In August 2013, Congress and the Air Force examined various proposals for an A-10 replacement, including the A-14, F-35 and the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle, and, despite the A-14’s better qualities in the ground attack role, the F-35 came out as the overall winner, since it was the USAF’s favorite. Despite its complexity, the F-35 was – intended as a multi-role tri-service aircraft and also with the perspective of bigger international sales than the more specialized A-14 – regarded as the more versatile and, in the long run, more cost-efficient procurement option. This sealed the A-14’s fate and the F-35A entered service with U.S. Air Force F-35A in August 2016 (after the F-35B was introduced to the U.S. Marine Corps in July 2015). At that time, the U.S. planned to buy 2,456 F-35s through 2044, which would represent the bulk of the crewed tactical airpower of the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps for several decades.
Since the A-14’s technology was considered to be too critical to be marketed to export customers (Israel showed early interest in the aircraft, as well as South Korea), the program was cancelled in 2016.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (pilot, WSO)
Length: 54 ft 11 1/2 in (16.78 m)
Wingspan: 62 ft 11 1/2 in (19.22 m)
Height: 11 ft 3 3/4 in (3.45 m)
Wing area: 374.9 ft² (117.5 m²)
Empty weight: 24,959 lb (11,321 kg)
Loaded weight: 30,384 lb (13,782 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 50,000 lb (22,700 kg)
Internal fuel capacity: 11,000 lb (4,990 kg)
Powerplant:
2× General Electric Whitney F412-GE-114 non-afterburning turbofans
with 12,000 lbf (53 kN) thrust each
Performance:
Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,010 km/h, 550 kn) at 40,000 ft altitude /
Mach 0.95 at sea level
Cruise speed: 560 mph (900 km/h, 487 kn) at 40,000 ft altitude
Range: 1,089 nmi (1,253 mi, 2,017 km)
Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,100 mi, 3,300 km)
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,200 m)
Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (250 m/s)
Wing loading: 133 lb/ft² (193 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.48 (full internal fuel, no stores)
Take-off run: 1,200 m (3,930 ft) at 42,000 lb (19,000 kg) over a 15 m (30 ft) obstacle
Armament:
1× General Dynamics GAU-12/U Equalizer 25 mm (0.984 in) 5-barreled rotary cannon
with 1,200 rounds (max. capacity 1,350 rounds)
4x internal weapon bays plus 4x external optional hardpoints with a total capacity of
15,000 lb (6,800 kg) and provisions to carry/deploy a wide range of ordnance
The kit and its assembly:
A major kitbashing project which I had on my idea list for a long time and its main ingredients/body donors already stashed away – but, as with many rather intimidating builds, it takes some external motivation to finally tackle the idea and bring it into hardware form. This came in August 2020 with the “Prototypes” group build at whatifmodellers.com, even though is still took some time to find the courage and mojo to start.
The original inspiration was the idea of a stealthy successor for the A-10, or a kind of more modern A-7 as an alternative to the omnipresent (and rather boring, IMHO) F-35. An early “ingredient” became the fuselage of a Zvezda Ka-58 stealth helicopter kit – I liked the edgy shape, the crocodile-like silhouette and the spacious side-by-side cockpit. Adding wings, however, was more challenging, and I remembered a 1:200 B-2A which I had turned into a light Swedish 1:72 attack stealth aircraft. Why not use another B-2 for the wings and the engines, but this time a bigger 1:144 model that would better match the quite bulbous Ka-58 fuselage? This donor became an Italeri kit.
Work started with the fuselage: the Ka-58’s engine and gearbox hump had to go first and a generous, new dorsal section had to be scratched with 1mm styrene sheet and some PSR. The cockpit and its glazing could be retained and were taken OOB. Under the nose, the Ka-58’s gun turret was omitted and a scratched front landing gear well was implanted instead.
The wings consist of the B-2 model; the lower “fuselage half” had its front end cut away, then the upper fuselage half of the Ka-58 was used as benchmark to cut the B-2’s upper wing/body part in two outer wing panels. Once these elements had been glued together, the Ka-58’s lower nose and tail section were tailored to match the B-2 parts. The B-2 engine bays were taken OOB and mounted next, so that the A-14’s basic hull was complete and the first major PSR session could start. Blending the parts into each other turned out to be a tedious process, since some 2-3 mm wide gaps had to be filled.
Once the basic BWP pack had been finished, I added the fins. These were taken from an 1:72 F-117 kit (IIRC from Italeri), which I had bought in a lot many moons ago. The fins were just adapted at their base to match the tail sting slope, and they were mounted in a 45° angle. This looks very F-117ish but was IMHO the most plausible solution.
Now that the overall length of the aircraft was defined, I could work on the final major assembly part: the wing tips. The 1:144 B-2 came with separate wing tip sections, but they proved to be much too long for the Squatina. After some trials I reduced their length by more than half, so that the B-2’s jagged wing trailing edge was kept. The result looks quite natural, even though blending the cut wing tips to the BWB turned out to be a PSR nightmare because their thickness reduces gently towards the tip – since I took out a good part of the inner section, the resulting step had to be sanded away and hidden with more PSR.
Detail work started next, including the cockpit glazing, the bomb bay (the B-2 kit comes with one of its bays open, and I kept this detail and modified the interior) and the landing gear, the latter was taken from the F-117 donor bank and fitted surprisingly well.
Some sensors were added, too, including a flat glass panel on the nose tip and a triangular IRST fairing under the nose, next to the landing gear well.
Painting and markings:
For a stealth aircraft and a prototype I wanted something subdued or murky, but not an all-black or -grey livery. I eventually settled for the rather dark paint scheme that the USAF applied to its late B-52Gs and the B-1Bs, which consists of two tones from above, FS 36081 (Dark Grey, a.k.a. Dark Gunship Grey) and 34086 (Green Drab), and underneath (FS 36081 and 36118 (Gunship Grey). The irregular pattern was adapted (in a rather liberal fashion) from the USAF’s early B-1Bs, using Humbrol 32, 108 and 125 as basic colors. The 108 turned out to be too bright, so I toned it down with an additional coat of thinned Humbrol 66. While this considerably reduced the contrast between the green and the grey, the combination looks much better and B-1B-esque.
The wings’ leading edges were painted for more contrast with a greyish black (Tar Black, Revell 09), while the landing gear, the interior of the air intakes and the open bomb bay became glossy white. The cockpit was painted in medium grey (Humbrol 140) and the clear parts received a thinned inner coating with a mix of transparent yellow and brown, simulating an anti-radar coating – even though the effect turned out to be minimal, now it looks as of the plastic parts had just yellowed from age…
After the initial livery had been finished the model received a black ink washing and some post-panel shading with slightly brightened variations of the basic tones (using Humbrol 79, 144 and 224). Decals were added next, an individual mix from various sources. The “Stars-and-Bars” come from a PrintScale A-7 sheet, most stencils come from an F-16 sheet.
After some more detail painting and a treatment with graphite on the metal areas (exhausts, gun port), the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
Batman’s next Batwing? Maybe, there’s certainly something fictional about this creation. But the “Squatina” turned out much more conclusive (and even pretty!) than I expected, even though it became a bigger aircraft than intended. And I am positively surprised how good the bodywork became – after all, lots of putty had to be used to fill all the gaps between parts that no one ever expected to be grafted together.
printed directly from an antique original glass plate: taken in 1900 / measures 5" x 7"
styrene board pre-coated with professional white medium (300mm x 220mm) / exposed for 2hrs
Sensitizer: VanDyke Brown print solution
Fixing agent: Citric acid solution & sodium thiosulfate solution (applied with a brush)
Toning: Bostick & Sullivan Gold toning kit (Ammonium Thiocyanate / Gold Chloride)
Enlarger: LPL Model 7451 large format enlarger (EL Nikkor 150mm / F5.6)
Light source: High power (50w) UV LED unit (SMD=surface mounted LED modules)
The condenser unit (= a unit in which two 16cm diameter convex lenses are set facing each other) was removed from my old Hansa patent enlarger for use in LPL Model 7451.
----
New group was created. If you like, please join.
06 - Lascaux Class.
Category: Model Kit.
Name: Lascaux Class.
Scale: Non.
Series: Mecha Collection.
Origin: Space Battleship Yamato 2199.
Brand: Bandai.
Material: Styrene plastic.
Release Date: Aug 2014.
Condition: Unassembled.
*Note: This is a Model Kit collected by my BB.
More in My Collection Corner.
+++ 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 Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was the first jet fighter used operationally by the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) during World War II. Designed and built by Lockheed in 1943 and delivered just 143 days from the start of design, production models were flying, and two pre-production models did see very limited service in Italy just before the end of World War II. The XP-80 had a conventional all-metal airframe, with a slim low wing and tricycle landing gear. Like most early jets designed during World War II—and before the Allies captured German research data that confirmed the speed advantages of swept-wings—the XP-80 had straight wings similar to previous propeller-driven fighters, but they were relatively thin to minimize drag at high speed.
The Shooting Star began to enter service in late 1944 with 12 pre-production YP-80As. Four were sent to Europe for operational testing (demonstration, familiarization, and possible interception roles), two to England and two to the 1st Fighter Group at Lesina Airfield, Italy. Because of delays in delivery of production aircraft, the Shooting Star saw no actual combat during the conflict. The initial production order was for 344 P-80As after USAAF acceptance in February 1945. A total of 83 P-80s had been delivered by the end of July 1945 and 45 assigned to the 412th Fighter Group (later redesignated the 1st Fighter Group) at Muroc Army Air Field. Production continued after the war, although wartime plans for 5,000 were quickly reduced to 2,000 at a little under $100,000 each. A total of 1,714 single-seat F-80A, F-80B, F-80C, and RF-80s were manufactured by the end of production in 1950, of which 927 were F-80Cs (including 129 operational F-80As upgraded to F-80C-11-LO standards). However, the two-seat TF-80C, first flown on 22 March 1948, became the basis for the T-33 trainer, of which 6,557 were produced.
Shooting Stars first saw combat service in the Korean War, and were among the first aircraft to be involved in jet-versus-jet combat. Despite initial claims of success, the speed of the straight-wing F-80s was inferior to the 668 mph (1075 km/h) swept-wing transonic MiG-15. The MiGs incorporated German research showing that swept wings delayed the onset of compressibility problems, and enabled speeds closer to the speed of sound. F-80s were soon replaced in the air superiority role by the North American F-86 Sabre, which had been delayed to also incorporate swept wings into an improved straight-winged naval FJ-1 Fury.
This prompted Lockheed to improve the F-80 to keep the design competitive, and the result became the F-80E, which was almost a completely different aircraft, despite similar outlines. Lockheed attempted to change as little of the original airframe as possible while the F-80E incorporated two major technical innovation of its time. The most obvious change was the introduction of swept wings for higher speed. After the engineers obtained German swept-wing research data, Lockheed gave the F-80E a 25° sweep, with automatically locking leading edge slots, interconnected with the flaps for lateral stability during take-off and landing, and the wings’ profile was totally new, too. The limited sweep was a compromise, because a 35° sweep had originally been intended, but the plan to retain the F-80’s fuselage and wing attachment points would have resulted in massive center of gravity and mechanical problems. However, wind tunnel tests quickly revealed that even this compromise would not be enough to ensure stable flight esp. at low speed, and that the modified aircraft would lack directional stability. The swept-wing aircraft’s design had to be modified further.
A convenient solution came in the form of the F-80’s trainer version fuselage, the T-33, which had been lengthened by slightly more than 3 feet (1 m) for a second seat, instrumentation, and flight controls, under a longer canopy. Thanks to the extended front fuselage, the T-33’s wing attachment points could accept the new 25° wings without much further modifications, and balance was restored to acceptable limits. For the fighter aircraft, the T-33’s second seat was omitted and replaced with an additional fuel cell. The pressurized front cockpit was retained, together with the F-80’s bubble canopy and out fitted with an ejection seat.
The other innovation was the introduction of reheat for the engine. The earlier F-80 fighters were powered by centrifugal compressor turbojets, the F-80C had already incorporated water injection to boost the rather anemic powerplant during the start phase and in combat. The F-80E introduced a modified engine with a very simple afterburner chamber, designated J33-A-39. It was a further advanced variant of the J33-A-33 for the contemporary F-94 interceptor with water-alcohol injection and afterburner. For the F-80E with less gross weight, the water-alcohol injection system was omitted so save weight and simplify the system, and the afterburner was optimized for quicker response. Outwardly, the different engine required a modified, wider tail section, which also slightly extended the F-80’s tail.
The F-80E’s armament was changed, too. Experience from the Korean War had shown that the American aircrafts’ traditional 0.5” machine guns were reliable, but they lacked firepower, esp. against bigger targets like bombers, and even fighter aircraft like the MiG-15 had literally to be drenched with rounds to cause significant damage. On the other side, a few 23 mmm rounds or just a single hit with an explosive 37 mm shell from a MiG could take a bomber down. Therefore, the F-80’s six machine guns in the nose were replaced with four belt-fed 20mm M24 cannon. This was a license-built variant of the gas-operated Hispano-Suiza HS.404 with the addition of electrical cocking, allowing the gun to re-cock over a lightly struck round. It offered a rate of fire of 700-750 rounds/min and a muzzle velocity of 840 m/s (2,800 ft/s).In the F-80E each weapon was provided with 190 rounds.
Despite the swept wings Lockheed retained the wingtip tanks, similar to Lockheed’s recently developed XF-90 penetration fighter prototype. They had a different, more streamlined shape now, to reduce drag and minimize the risk of torsion problems with the outer wing sections and held 225 US gal (187 imp gal; 850 l) each. Even though the F-80E was conceived as a daytime fighter, hardpoints under the wings allowed the carriage of up to 2.000 lb of external ordnance, so that the aircraft could, like the straight-wing F-80s before, carry out attack missions. A reinforced pair of plumbed main hardpoints, just outside of the landing gear wells, allowed to carry another pair of drop tanks for extra range or single bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber. A smaller, optional pair of pylons was intended to carry pods with nineteen “Mighty Mouse” 2.75 inches (70 mm) unguided folding-fin air-to-air rockets, and further hardpoints under the outer wings allowed eight 5” HVAR unguided air-to-ground rockets to be carried, too. Total external payload (including the wing tip tanks) was 4,800 lb (roughly 2,200 kg) of payload
The first XP-80E prototype flew in December 1953 – too late to take part in the Korean War, but Lockheed kept the aircraft’s development running as the benefits of swept wings were clearly visible. The USAF, however, did not show much interest in the new aircraft since the proven F-86 Sabre was readily available and focus more and more shifted to radar-equipped all-weather interceptors armed with guided missiles. However, military support programs for the newly founded NATO, esp. in Europe, stoked the demand for jet fighters, so that the F-80E was earmarked for export to friendly countries with air forces that had still to develop their capabilities after WWII. One of these was Germany; after World War II, German aviation was severely curtailed, and military aviation was completely forbidden after the Luftwaffe of the Third Reich had been disbanded by August 1946 by the Allied Control Commission. This changed in 1955 when West Germany joined NATO, as the Western Allies believed that Germany was needed to counter the increasing military threat posed by the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies. On 9 January 1956, a new German Air Force called Luftwaffe was founded as a branch of the new Bundeswehr (Federal Defence Force). The first volunteers of the Luftwaffe arrived at the Nörvenich Air Base in January 1956, and the same year, the Luftwaffe was provided with its first jet aircraft, the US-made Republic F-84 Thunderstreak from surplus stock, complemented by newly built Lockheed F-80E day fighters and T-33 trainers.
A total of 43 F-80Es were delivered to Germany in the course of 1956 and early 1957 via freight ships as disassembled kits, initially allocated to WaSLw 10 (Waffenschule der Luftwaffe = Weapon Training School of the Luftwaffe) at Nörvenich, one of three such units which focused on fighter training. The unit was quickly re-located to Northern Germany to Oldenburg, an airfield formerly under British/RAF governance, where the F-80Es were joined by Canada-built F-86 Sabre Mk. 5s. Flight operations began there in November 1957. Initially supported by flight instructors from the Royal Canadian Air Force from Zweibrücken, the WaSLw 10’s job was to train future pilots for jet aircraft on the respective operational types. F-80Es of this unit were in the following years furthermore frequently deployed to Decimomannu AB on Sardinia (Italy), as part of multi-national NATO training programs.
The F-80Es’ service at Oldenburg with WaSLw 10 did not last long, though. In 1963, basic flight and weapon system training was relocated to the USA, and the so-called Europeanization was shifted to the nearby Jever air base, i. e. the training in the more crowded European airspace and under notoriously less pleasant European weather conditions. The remaining German F-80E fleet was subsequently allocated to the Jagdgeschwader 73 “Steinhoff” at Pferdsfeld Air Base in Rhineland-Palatinate, where the machines were – like the Luftwaffe F-86s – upgraded to carry AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs, a major improvement of their interceptor capabilities. But just one year later, on October 1, 1964, JG 73 was reorganized and renamed Fighter-Bomber Squadron 42, and the unit converted to the new Fiat G.91 attack aircraft. In parallel, the Luftwaffe settled on the F-86 (with more Sabre Mk. 6s from Canada and new F-86K all-weather interceptors from Italian license production) as standard fighter, with the plan to convert to the supersonic new Lockheed F-104 as standard NATO fighter as soon as the type would become available.
For the Luftwaffe the F-80E had become obsolete, and to reduce the number of operational aircraft types, the remaining German aircraft, a total of 34, were in 1965 passed through to the Türk Hava Kuvvetleri (Turkish air force) as part of international NATO military support, where they remained in service until 1974 and were replaced by third generation F-4E Phantom II fighter jets.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 36 ft 9 1/2 in (11.23 m)
Wingspan: 37 ft 6 in (11.44 m) over tip tanks
Height: 13 ft 5 1/4 in (4.10 m)
Wing area: 241.3 sq ft (22,52 m²)
Empty weight: 10,681 lb (4.845 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 18,464 lb (8.375 kg)
Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0134
Frontal area: 32 sq ft (3.0 m²)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-39 centrifugal compressor turbojet with 4,600 lbf (20 kN) dry thrust
and 27.0 kN (6,070 lbf) thrust with afterburning
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,060 km/h (660 mph, 570 kn)
Cruise speed: 439 mph (707 km/h, 381 kn)
Range: 825 mi (1,328 km, 717 nmi)
Ferry range: 1,380 mi (2,220 km, 1,200 nmi)
Service ceiling: 50,900 ft (15,500 m)
Rate of climb: 7,980 ft/min (40.5 m/s)
Time to altitude: 20,000 ft (6,100 m) in 4 minutes 50 seconds
Lift-to-drag: 17.7
Wing loading: 51.3 lb/sq ft (250 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.249 dry
0.328 with afterburner
Armament:
4× 0.79 in (20 mm) M24 cannon (190 rpg)
2x wing tip auxiliary tanks with 225 US gal (187 imp gal; 850 l) each
Underwing hardpoints for a total ordnance load of 4,800 lb (2.200 kg), including
2× 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs, up to 4× pods with nineteen unguided Mighty Mouse FFARs each,
and/or up to 8× 5” (127 mm) HVAR unguided air-to-ground rockets
The kit and its assembly:
The idea of a swept-wing F-80 had been lingering on my idea list for a while, and I actually tried this stunt before in the form of a heavily modified F-94. The recent “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers.com and a similar build by fellow forum member mat revived the interest in this topic – and inspired by mat’s creation, based on a T-33 fuselage, I decided to use the opportunity and add my personal interpretation of the idea.
Having suitable donor parts at hand was another decisive factor to start this build: I had a Heller T-33 in store, which had already been (ab)used as a donor bank for other projects, and which could now find a good use. I also had an F-80 canopy left over (from an Airfix kit), and my plan was to use Saab J29 wings (from a Matchbox kit) because of their limited sweep angle that would match the post-WWII era well.
Work started with the fuselage; it required a completely new cockpit interior because these parts had already gone elsewhere. I found a cockpit tub with its dashboard from an Italeri F4U, and with some trimming it could be mounted into the reduced cockpit opening, above the OOB front landing gear well. The T-33’s rear seat was faired of with styrene sheet and later PSRed away. The standard nose cone from the Heller T-33 was used, but I added gun ports for the new/different cannon armament.
For a different look with an afterburner engine I modified the tail section under the stabilizers, which was retained because of its characteristic shape. A generous section from the tail was cut away and replaced with the leftover jet pipe from an Italeri (R)F-84F, slightly longer and wider and decorated with innards from a Matchbox Mystère IV. This change is rather subtle but changes the F-80 profile and appears like a compromise between the F-80 and F-94 arrangements.
The T-33 wings were clipped down to the connection lower fuselage part. This ventral plate with integral main landing gear wells was mounted onto the T-33 hull and then the Saab 29 wings were dry-fitted to check their position along the fuselage and to define the main landing gear wells, which had to be cut into them to match their counterparts from the aircraft’s belly.
Their exact position was eventually fixed when the new swept stabilizers, taken from a Hobby Boss F-86, were mounted to the tail. They match well with the swept wings, and for an odd look I kept their dihedral.
The fin was eventually replaced, too – mat’s build retained the original F-80 fin, but with all other surfaces swept I found that the fin had to reflect this, too. So, I implanted a shortened Italeri (R)F-84F fin onto the original base, blended with some PSR into the rest of the tail.
With all aerodynamic surfaces in place it was time for fine-tuning, and to give the aircraft a simpler look I removed the dog teeth from the late Tunnan's outer wings, even though I retained the small LERXs. The wing tips were cut down a little and tip tanks (probably drop tanks from a Hobby Boss F-5E) added – without them the aircraft looked like a juvenile Saab 32!
The landing gear was mostly taken over from the Heller T-33, I just added small consoles for the main landing gear struts to ensure a proper stance, because the new wings and the respective attachment points were deeper. I also had to scratch some landing gear covers because the T-33 donor kit was missing them. The canopy was PSRed over the new opening and a new ejection seat tailored to fit into the F4U cockpit.
A final addition was a pair of pods with unguided FFARs. AFAIK the Luftwaffe did not use such weapons, but they’d make thematically sense on a Fifties anti-bomber interceptor - and I had a suitable pair left over from a Matchbox Mystère IV kit, complete with small pylons.
Painting and markings:
Since the time frame was defined by the Fifties, early Luftwaffe fighters had to carry a bare metal finish, with relatively few decorations. For the F-80E I gave the model an overall base coat with White Aluminum from a Dupli Color rattle can, a very nice and bright silver tone that comes IMHO close to NMF. Panels were post-shaded with Revell 99 (Aluminum) and 91 (Iron Metallic). An anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen was painted in the Luftwaffe tone RAL 6014, Gelboliv (Revell 42).
For some color highlights I gave the tip tanks bright red (Feuerrot, RAL 3000; Revell 330) outer halves, while the inner halves were painted black to avoid reflections that could distract the pilot (seen on a real Luftwaffe T-33 from the late Fifties). For an even more individual touch I added light blue (Tamiya X-14, Sky Blue) highlights on the nose and the fin, reflecting the squadron’s color code which is also carried within the unit emblem – the Tamiya paint came closest to the respective decal (see below).
The cockpit interior was painted with zinc chromate green primer (I used Humbrol 80, which is brighter than the tone should be, but it adds contrast to the black dials on the dashboard), the landing gear wells were painted with a mix of Humbrol 80 and 81, for a more yellowish hue. The landing gear struts became grey, dry-brushed with silver, while the inside of the ventral air brakes were painted in Feuerrot, too.
Then the model received an overall washing with black ink to emphasize the recessed panel lines, plus additional panel shading with Matt Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol 27001), plus a light rubbing treatment with grinded graphite that emphasized the (few leftover) raised panel lines and also added a dark metallic shine to the silver base. Some of the lost panel lines were simulated with simple pencil strokes, too.
The decals/markings primarily came from an AirDoc aftermarket sheet for late Fifties Luftwaffe F-84Fs. The tactical code (“BB-xxx” was then assigned to the WaSLw 10 as unit code, but this soon changed to a similar but different format that told about the unit’s task as well as the specific unit and squadron within it; this was replaced once more by a simple xx+yy code that was only connected to a specific aircraft with no unit reference anymore, and this format is still in use today) was puzzled together from single letters/digits from the same decal set. Some additional markings like the red band on the fuselage had to be scratched, but most stencils came from an all-bare-metal Luftwaffe F-84F.
After some more detail painting the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic paint, just the anti-glare panel and the di-electric fairings on the nose and the fin tip became matt.
A thorough kitbashing build, but the result looks quite plausible, if not elegant? The slightly swept wings suit the F-80 with its organic fuselage shape well, even though they reveal the designs rather baroque shape. There’s a sense of obsolescence about the F-80E, despite its modern features? The Luftwaffe markings work well on the aircraft, too, and with the red and blue highlights the machine looks more attractive despite its simple NMF livery than expected.
Oh, it's you. It's been a long time. How have you been? I've been really busy being constructed of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. You know, after you murdered me?
Fortunately the Aperture Science Emergency Recreational Building Element Reconstruction Initiative has provided me with a new body. Consequently, testing can recommence immediately.
For Science.
You monster.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In 1948, a swept wing version of the F-84 was created with the hope of bringing performance to the level of the F-86. The last production F-84E was fitted with a swept tail, a new wing with 38.5 degrees of leading-edge sweep and 3.5 degrees of anhedral, and a J35-A-25 engine producing 5,300 pound-force (23.58 kN) of thrust. The aircraft was designated XF-96A and flew on 3 June 1950. Although the airplane was capable of 602 knots (693 mph, 1,115 km/h), the performance gain over the F-84E was considered minor. Nonetheless, it was ordered into production in July 1950 as the F-84F Thunderstreak. The F-84 designation was eventually retained because the fighter was expected to be a low-cost improvement of the straight-wing Thunderjet with over 55 percent commonality in tooling.
In the meantime, the USAF, hoping for improved high-altitude performance from a more powerful engine, arranged for the British Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine to be built in the United States as the Wright J65. To accommodate the larger engine, YF-84Fs with a British-built Sapphire as well as production F-84Fs with the J65 had a vertically stretched fuselage, with the air intake attaining an oval cross-section. Production quickly ran into problems, though. Although tooling commonality with the Thunderjet was supposed to be 55 %, but just 15 % of the tools could actually be re-used. To make matters worse, the F-84F utilized press-forged wing spars and ribs. At the time, only three presses in the United States could manufacture these, and priority was given to the Boeing B-47 Stratojet bomber over the F-84. The YJ65-W-1 engine was considered obsolete, too, and the improved J65-W-3 did not become available until 1954. When the first production F-84F flew on 22 November 1952, it was considered not ready for operational deployment due to control and stability problems. The first 275 aircraft, equipped with conventional stabilizer-elevator tailplanes, suffered from accelerated stall pitch-up and poor turning ability at combat speeds. Beginning with Block 25, the problem was improved upon by the introduction of a hydraulically powered one-piece stabilator. A number of aircraft were also retrofitted with spoilers for improved high-speed control. As a result, the F-84F was not declared operational until 12 May 1954.
The second YF-84F prototype was completed with wing-root air intakes. These were not adopted for the fighter due to loss of thrust, but this arrangement kept the nose section free and permitted placement of cameras, and the different design was adopted for the RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. Being largely identical to the F-84F, the Thunderflash suffered from the same production delays and engine problems, though, delaying operational service until March 1954.
During the F-84F’s development the Air Defense Command was looking for a replacement for the outdated F-94 ‘Starfire’ interceptor, a hasty development from the T-33 trainer airframe with an afterburner engine and an on-board radar. However, the F-94 was only armed with machine guns in its early versions or unguided missiles in its later incarnations, which were inadequate. An aircraft with better performance, ideally with supersonic speed, a better radar, and the ability to carry guided missiles (in the form if the AIR-1 and 2 ‘Falcon’ AAMs) as well as the AIR-2 ‘Genie’ missile was now requested.
The Douglas AIR-2 Genie followed a unique but effective concept that represented the technological state-of-the-art: it was an unguided air-to-air rocket with a 1.5 kt W25 nuclear warhead. The interception of Soviet strategic bombers was a major military preoccupation of the late 1940s and 1950s. The World War II-age fighter armament of machine guns and cannon were inadequate to stop attacks by massed bomber formations, which were expected to come in at high altitude and at high subsonic speed. Firing large volleys of unguided rockets into bomber formations was not much better, and true air-to-air missiles were in their infancy. In 1954 Douglas Aircraft began a program to investigate the possibility of a nuclear-armed air-to-air weapon. To ensure simplicity and reliability, the weapon would be unguided, since the large blast radius made precise accuracy unnecessary. Full-scale development began in 1955, with test firing of inert warhead rockets commencing in early 1956. The final design carried a 1.5-kiloton W25 nuclear warhead and was powered by a Thiokol SR49-TC-1 solid-fuel rocket engine of 162 kN (36,000 lbf) thrust, sufficient to accelerate the rocket to Mach 3.3 during its two-second burn. Total flight time was about 12 seconds, during which time the rocket covered 10 km (6.2 mi). Targeting, arming, and firing of the weapon were coordinated by the launch aircraft's fire-control system. Detonation was by time-delay fuze, although the fuzing mechanism would not arm the warhead until engine burn-out, to give the launch aircraft sufficient time to turn and escape. However, there was no mechanism for disarming the warhead after launch. Lethal radius of the blast was estimated to be about 300 meters (980 ft). Once fired, the Genie's short flight-time and large blast radius made it virtually impossible for a bomber to avoid destruction. The rocket entered service with the designation MB-1 Genie in 1957.
During the development phase the first carrier aircraft earmarked to carry the AIR-2 was the Northrop F-89 Scorpion, which had already been introduced in the early Fifties. While being an all-weather interceptor with on-board radar, it was a slow and large aircraft, and outdated like the F-94. Trying to keep the F-84 production lines busy, however, Republic saw the chance to design an all-weather interceptor aircraft that would surpass the F-89’s mediocre performance and meet the AIR-2 carrier requirements on the basis of the swept-wing (R)F-84F. To emphasize its dedicated interceptor role and set it apart from its fighter-bomber ancestors, the heavily modified aircraft was designated F-96B (even though it had little to do with the XF-96A that became the F-84F) and called ‘Thunderguard’.
The F-96B was largely based on the RF-84F’s airframe with its wing-root air intakes, what offered ample space in the aircraft’s nose for a radar system and other equipment. The radar was coupled with a state-of-the-art Hughes MC-10 fire control system. To relieve the pilot from operating the radar system one of the fuel cells behind the cockpit was deleted and a second crew member was placed behind him under an extended, strutless hood that opened to starboard. To compensate for the loss of fuel and maintain the F-84F’s range, a new tank was mounted under the cockpit floor in the aircraft’s center of gravity.
To improve performance and cope with the raised take-off weight, the F-96B was powered by an uprated Wright J65-W-18 turbojet, which generated 0.4 kN more dry thrust than the F-84F’s original J65-W-3 (7,700 lbf/34 kN). This was not too much, though, so that the J65 was additionally outfitted with an afterburner. With this upgrade the powerplant provided a maximum thrust of 10,500 lbf (47 kN), what resulted in a markedly improved rate of climb and the ability to break the sound barrier in level flight. The additional reheat section necessitated a wider and longer rear fuselage, which had to be redesigned. As an unintended side benefit, this new tail section reduced overall drag due to a slightly area-ruled coke-bottle shape behind the wings’ trailing edge, which was even emphasized through the ventral brake parachute fairing.
Armament consisted only of missiles, which were all carried externally on wing stations, all guns of the former F-84 versions were deleted to save weight. The F-96B’s weapons range included GAR-1/2/3/4 (Later re-designated as AIM-4) radar- and IR-guided Falcon air-to-air missiles and a pair of MB-1 Genie missiles. Up to four pods with nineteen unguided 2.75 in (70 mm) "Mighty Mouse" Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each were an alternative, too, and a pair of drop tanks were typically carried under the inner wings to provide the aircraft with sufficient range, since the new afterburner significantly increased fuel consumption.
Even though it was only a derivative design, the F-96B introduced a lot of innovations. One of these was the use of a diverertless supersonic inlet (DSI), a novel type of jet engine air intake to control air flow into their engines. Initial research into the DSI was done by Antonio Ferri in the 1950s. It consisted of a "bump" and a forward-swept inlet cowl, which worked together to divert boundary layer airflow away from the aircraft's engine. In the case of the F-96B this was realized as an inward-turning inlet with a variable contraction ratio. However, even though they had not been deemed necessary to guarantee a clean airflow, the F-96B’s air intakes were further modified with splitter plates to adapt them to the expected higher flight speeds and direct the air flow. The initial flight tests had also revealed a directional instability at high speed, due to the longer nose, so that the tail surfaces (both fin and stabilizers) were enlarged for the serial aircraft to compensate.
Another novel feature was an IRST sensor in front of the windscreen which augmented the on-board radar. This sensor, developed by Hughes International and designated ‘X-1’, was still very experimental, though, highly unreliable, and difficult to handle, because it relied on pressurized coolant to keep the sensor cold enough to operate properly, and dosing it at a consistent level proved to be difficult (if not impossible). On the other side the IRST allowed to track targets even in a massively radar-jammed environment. The 7” diameter silicone sensor was, together with the on-board radar, slaved to the fire control system so that its input could be used to lock guided missiles onto targets, primarily the GAR-1 and GAR-2 AAMs. The X-1 had a field of view of 70×140°, with an angular resolution of 1°, and operated in 2.5 micron wavelength range. When it worked properly the sensor was able to detect a B-47-sized aircraft’s tails aspect from 25 nm (29 ml/46 km) and a target of similar size from directly ahead from 10 nm (12 ml/19 km). Later, better developed versions of Hughes IRST, like the X-3 that was retrofitted to the F-101B in the early Sixties, had a better range and were more reliable.
During the Thunderguard’s development another competitor entered the stage, the F-101B Voodoo. In the late 1940s, the Air Force had already started a research project into the future interceptor aircraft that eventually settled on an advanced specification known as the 1954 interceptor. Contracts for this specification eventually resulted in the selection of the F-102 Delta Dagger, but by 1952 it was becoming clear that none of the parts of the specification other than the airframe would be ready by 1954; the engines, weapons, and fire control systems were all going to take too long to get into service. An effort was then started to quickly produce an interim supersonic design to replace the various subsonic interceptors then in service, and the F-101 airframe was selected as a starting point. Although McDonnell proposed the designation F-109 for the new aircraft (which was to be a substantial departure from the basic Voodoo fighter bomber), the USAF assigned the designation F-101B. Its development was protracted, so that the F-96B – even though it offered less performance – was ordered into production to fill the USAF’s urgent interceptor gap.
F-96B production started after a brief test phase in late 1957, and the first aircraft were delivered to the 60th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron in 1958. However, when it became clear that the F-101B would finally enter service in 1959, F-96B production was quickly cut down and the initial order of 300 aircraft reduced to only 150, which were produced until early 1960 in three batches. Only sixty were directly delivered to ADC units, because these were preferably equipped with the supersonic F-102A and the new F-101B, which could also carry the nuclear Genie missile. The rest was directly handed over to Air National Guard units – and even there they were quickly joined and replaced by the early ADC aircraft.
Operationally, almost all F-96Bs functioned under the US–Canadian North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), which protected North American airspace from Soviet intruders, particularly the threat posed by nuclear-armed bombers. In service, the F-96Bs were soon upgraded with a data link to the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system, allowing ground controllers to steer the aircraft towards its targets by making adjustments through the plane's autopilot. Furthermore, the F-96B was upgraded to allow the carrying of two GAR-11/AIM-26 Nuclear Falcon missiles instead of the Genies when they became available in 1961.
A handful F-96Bs were camouflaged during the late Sixties with the USAF’s new SEA scheme, but most aircraft retained their original bare metal finish with more or less colorful unit markings. Due to its limited capabilities and the introduction of the Mach 2 McDonnell F-4 Phantom, the last F-96B was retired from ANG service in 1971.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 54t 11 1/2 in (16,77 m) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 33 ft 7.25 in (10,25 m)
Height: 16 ft 9 in (5,11 m)
Wing area: 350 sq ft (37,55 m²)
Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6.264 kg)
Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9.541 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 28,000 lb (12.701 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Wright J65-W-18 turbojet with 8,600 lbf (34 kN) dry thrust and 10,500 lbf (47 kN) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 695 mph (1,119 km/h, 604 kn, Mach 1.1) at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)
Cruise speed: 577 mph (928 km/h, 501 kn)
Range: 810 mi (1,304 km, 704 nmi) combat radius with two droptanks
Service ceiling: 49,000 ft (15,000 m)
Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)
Wing loading: 86 lb/sq ft (423 kg/m²)
Armament:
No internal guns;
6× underwing hardpoints for a total ordnance load of up to 6,000lb (2,727 kg), including
a pair of 191.5 US gal (727 l) or 375 US gal (1.429 l) drop tanks on the inner stations
and a mix of AIM-4 Falcon (up to six), MB-1 Genie (up to two) and/or pods with
nineteen 2.75”/70 mm FFAR unguided missiles each (up to four) on the outer stations
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional missing link between the RF-84F and the F-105 was conceived for the Fifties Group Build at whatifmodellers.com, an era when the USAF used a wide variety of interceptor aircraft types and technical advancements were quick and significant – in just a decade the interceptor evolved from a subsonic machine gun-toting aircraft to a guided weapons carrier platform, capable of Mach 2.
The F-96B (I re-used Republic’s dropped designation for the swept-wing F-84F) was to display one of the many “in between” designs, and the (R)F-84F was just a suitable basis for a conversion similar to the T-33-derived F-94, just more capable and big enough to carry the nuclear Genie missile.
The basis became Italeri’s vintage RF-84F kit, a rather simple affair with raised panel lines and a mediocre fit, plus some sinkholes. This was, however, heavily modified!
Work started with the implantation of a new tandem cockpit, taken wholesale from a Heller T-33. Fitting the cockpit tub into the wider Thunderflash hull was a bit tricky, putty blobs held the implant in place. The canopy was taken from the T-33, too, just the RF-84F’s original rear side windows were cut away to offer sufficient length for the longer clear part and the cockpit side walls had to be raised to an even level with the smaller windscreen with the help of styrene strips. With these adapters the T-33 canopy fitted surprisingly well over the opening and blended well into the spine.
The camera nose section lost its tip, which was replaced with the tail cone from a Matchbox H.S. Buccaneer (actually its air brake), and the camera windows as well as the slant surfaces that held them were PSRed away for a conical shape that extended the new pointed radome. Lots of weight in the nose and under the cockpit floor ensured a safe stance on the OOB landing gear.
The rear section behind the air brakes became all-new; for an afterburner I extended and widened the tail section and implanted the rear part from a B-66 (Italeri kit, too) engine nacelle, which received a wider nozzle (left over from a Nakotne MiG-29, a featureless thing) and an interior.
To balance the longer nose I also decided to enlarge the tail surfaces and replaced the OOB fin and stabilizers with leftover parts from a Trumpeter Il-28 bomber – the fin was shortened and the stabilizers reduced in span to match the rest of the aircraft. Despite the exotic source the parts blend well into the F-84’s overall design!
To add supersonic credibility and to connect the design further with the later F-105 I modified the air intakes and cut them into a raked shape – quite easy to realize. Once the wings were in place, I also added small splitter plates, left over from an Airfix BAC Strikemaster.
As an interceptor the armament had to be adapted accordingly, and I procured the quartet of IR-guided Falcons as well as the Genie duo from an Academy F-89. The large drop tanks were taken OOB from the Italeri kit. The Genies were mounted onto their massive Scorpion pylons under the outer wings of the F-96B, while the Falcons, due to relatively little space left under the wings, required a scratched solution. I eventually settled for dual launchers on small pylons, mounted in front of the landing gear wells. The pylons originally belong to an ESCI Ka-34 “Hokum” helicopter kit (they were just short enough!), the launch rails are a halved pair of F-4 Sidewinder rails from a Hasegawa air-to-air weapons set. With everything on place the F-96B looks quite crowded.
Painting and markings:
The machine would represent a late Fifties USAF type, so that the paint options were rather limited if I wanted to be authentic. ADC Grey was introduced in the early Sixties, SEA camouflage even later, so that bare metal became a natural choice – but this can be quite attractive! The model received an overall coat with acrylic “White Aluminum” from the rattle can, plus some darked panels all over the hull (Humbrol 56 for good contrast) and an afterburner section in Revell 91 (Iron Metallic) and Humbrol’s Steel Metallizer. The radome became deep black, the anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen olive drab (Revell 46). Light grey (Revell 75) was used for some small di-electric fairings.
Interior surfaces (cockpit and landing gear wells) were painted with Zinc Chromate primer (I used Humbrol 80), while the landing gear struts became silver-grey (Humbrol 56) and the inside of the covers as well as the air brakes were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19).
Once basic painting was done the model received a black ink washing and was rubbed with grinded graphite to emphasize the raised panel lines, and the material adds a nice dark metallic shine to the silver base coat.
Another challenge was to find suitable unit markings for the Fifties era in the decal vault, which would also fit onto the model. After a long search I eventually settled for rather simple markings from a 325th FIS F-102 from an Xtradecal sheet, which only features a rather timid fin decoration.
Finding other suitable standard markings remained demanding, though. Stars-And-Bars as well as the USAF taglines were taken from the Academy F-89 that also provided the ordnance, most stencils were taken from the OOB Italeri sheet and complemented by small markings from the scrap box. The biggest problem was the creation of a matching serial number. The “FF” code was originally used for P/F-51D Mustangs during the Korea War, but after the type had been phased out it might have been re-used? The letters as well as the serial number digits were created from various markings for USAF F-100s, also from an Xtradecal sheet.
Once the decals had been applied the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish, except for the radome, the anti-glare panel as well as the walking areas on the wings as well as parts of the afterburner section, which were coated with matt varnish.
A rather straightforward conversion, even though finishing the project took longer than expected. But the result looks surprisingly natural and plausible. Lots of PSR was needed to modify the fuselage, though, especially the tail section was not easy to integrate into the Thunderflash’s hull. Sticking to the simple NMF livery paid IMHO out, too: the livery looks very natural and believable on the fictional aircraft, and it suits the F-84’s bulbous shape well.
Some background:
The MBR-04 series were the first combat-ready Destroids and the most successful land-combat weapon Destroids that were built with OverTechnology of Macross. The abbreviation MBR (Main Battle Robot) indicates the model was developed as a walking humanoid weapon emphasizing the heavy armor firepower of an artillery combat vehicle, designed to replace mainline battle tanks. The Type 04 series was developed jointly by Viggers and Chrauler. Unlike the variable fighters, which had to be designed to accommodate transformation mechanisms, the MBR series featured a structure with a large capacity that allowed plenty of room for machinery and armor.
The initial development line, the "Tomahawk" multipurpose battle robot and comparable in its intended role with former main battle tanks, had inferior anti-aircraft abilities, even though it boasted firepower like no other biped vehicle from the Destroid series. Originally, the Tomahawk was just called "MBR Mk. I", but once its systems and structural elements became the basis for other models, its designation changed into the "Type 04" Destroid. The main frame from the waist down, a module which consolidated the thermonuclear reactor and ambulatory OverTechnology system of the Destroids, was common to all of the Type 04 series of biped battle robots. Production line integration using this module was a key goal of Destroid development, and the quick development of further variants.
The ADR-04-Mk. X Defender Destroid was one of these family members, a walking weapon developed using OverTechnology for deployment by the United Nations Military. During development of the MBR-04-Mk I, a version of the Destroid ambulatory system with the anti-aircraft Contraves system (for use during the early stages of battle) was simultaneously being developed in a joint effort by Viggers-Chrauler under direction from the United Nations. This initial support Destroid, tentatively designated ADR-04-Mk. II, which still shared many components and even hull sections with the Tomahawk, did not progress beyond prototype stage - primarily because of a focus on the Tomahawk as UN's primary ground weapon. It nevertheless provided vital input for the ADR-04-Mk. X Defender, which became an important defensive asset to protect ground troops and vital locations, as well as for operations in space on board of the SDF-1.
Designed for the purpose of super-long-range firing in atmosphere and space, the Defender was rolled out in March 2009 and immediately put into action against the Zentraedi military. Unfortunately, the cost of the unit was high and posed significant difficulties for manufacturing, especially installing the high-definition targeting system, which lead to a bottleneck during mass production.
The ADR-04-Mk. X Defender's only weapons were two stub arms, each featuring a pair of large-caliber, specialized interception capability guns instead of manipulators, similar to the eventual mass-produced MBR-04-Mk. VI Tomahawk. The anti-aircraft engagement model (anti-tank class) wide-bore guns each fired 500 rounds per minute and all four barrels firing in combination were able to unleash continuous 2,000 rounds per minute, even though only short bursts of four rounds or just single shots were typically fired to save ammunition. The 78 mm rounds were aimed via an Erlikon Contraves fire control system and fired at an impressive muzzle velocity of 3,300 meters per second. A wide range of ammunition types could be fired, including HE, AP, APDS high speed, massive kinetic impact rounds, EMP grenades and rounds with chaff/flare/thermal mist charges. The internal belt magazines made it was possible to load up to three different types per twin gun and deliberately switch between them. The overall supply was, however, rather limited.
The rotating mechanism structure of the upper body allowed the unit to respond quickly to enemies approaching even from the rear, for a full 360° coverage of the whole hemisphere above the Destroid. Due to the independent arms, the Defender could even engage two targets separately and split its firepower among them. Additionally, the targeting system was capable of long-range firing in space and could perform extremely precise shooting at long distances in a vacuum/zero-G environment. Hence, the Defender Destroid was more a next generation anti-aircraft tank and in service frequently moonlighted as a movable defensive turret. However, despite featuring a common Destroid ambulatory system, the Defender's mobility was rather limited in direct comparison with a variable fighter Battroid, and it lacked any significant close-combat capability, so that it remained a dedicated support vehicle for other combat units.
180 ADR-04-Mk. X Defenders were ordered, built and operated by UN ground and space forces, about half of them were deployed on board of SDF-1. During the First Space War, around sixty more Defenders were converted from revamped MBR-04 series chassis, mostly from battle-damaged Tomahawks, but some later Phalanx' units were modified, too.
During its career the Defender was gradually upgraded with better sensors and radar systems, and its armament was augmented, too. A common upgrade were enlarged ammunition bays on the shoulders that could hold 50 more rounds per gun, even though this stressed the ambulatory system since the Defender's center of gravity was raised. Therefore, this modification was almost exclusively executed among stationary "gun turret" units. Another late upgrade was the addition of launch rails for AMM-1 anti-aircraft missiles on the gun pods and/or the torso. Again, this was almost exclusively implemented on stationary Defenders.
A short-range sub-variant, under the project handle "Cheyenne", was developed in 2010, too, but it was only produced in small number for evaluation purposes. It was based on the Defender's structure, but it carried a different armament, consisting of a pair of 37 mm six-barrel gatling guns plus AMM-1 missiles, and a more clutter-resistant radar system against fast and low-flying targets. The Cheyenne was intended as a complementary aerial defense unit, but the results from field tests were not convincing, so that the project was mothballed. However, in 2012 the concept was developed further into the ADR-04-Mk.XI "Manticore", which was fully tailored to the short-range defense role.
General characteristics:
Equipment Type: aerial defense robot, series 04
Government: U.N. Spacy
Manufacturer: Viggers/Chrauler
Introduction: March 2009
Accommodation: 1 pilot
Dimensions:
Height 11.37 meters (overall)
10.73 meters (w/o surveillance radar antenna)
Length 4.48 meters (hull only)
7.85 meters (guns forward)
Width 8.6 meters
Mass: 27.1 metric tons
Power Plant:
Kranss-Maffai MT828 thermonuclear reactor, output rated at 2800 shp;
plus an auxiliary GE EM10T fuel power generator, output rated at 510 kW
Propulsion:
2x thrust nozzles mounted in the lower back region, allowing the capability to perform jumps,
plus several vernier nozzles around the hull for Zero-G manoeuvers
Performance:
Max. walking speed: 72 kph when fully loaded
Design features:
- Detachable weapons bay (attaches to the main body via two main locks);
- Type 966 PFG Contraves radar and fire control set (a.k.a. Contraves II)
with respective heat exchanger on the upper back
- Rotating surveillance antenna for full 360° air space coverage
- Optical sensor unit equipped with four camera eyes, moving along a vertical slit,
protected by a polarized light shield;
- Capable of performing Zero-G manoeuvers via 16 x thrust nozzles (mounted around the hull);
- Reactor radiator with exhaust ports in the rear;
- Cockpit can be separated from the body in an emergency (only the cockpit block is recovered);
- Option pack featuring missiles or enlarged ammunition bays;
Armament:
2x Erlikon 78mm liquid-cooled high-speed 2-barrel automatic cannon with 200 rounds each,
mounted as arms
The kit and its assembly:
A kind of nostalgia trip, because my first ever mecha kit I bought and built in the Eighties was this 1:100 Destroid Defender! It still exists, even though only as a re-built model, and I thought that it was about time to build another, “better” one, to complete my collection of canonical Macross Destroids.
With this objective, the vintage kit was built basically OOB, just with some detail enhancements. The biggest structural change is a new hip joint arrangement, made from steel wire. It allows a more or less flexible 3D posture of the legs, for a more dynamic “walking” pose, and the resulting gaps were filled with paper tissue drenched in white glue and acrylic paint.
A more cosmetic change concerns the Defender’s optical sensor array on its “head”. OOB it just consists of a wide “slit” with a square window – very basic, but that’s how the defender is depicted in the TV series. However, I have a Macross artbook with original design sketches from Studio Nue, which reveal more details of this arrangement, and these include a kind of louvre that covers the mobile sensor array’s guide rails, and the sensor array itself consists of several smaller optical units – the relatively new 1:72 Defender from WAVE features these details, too, but the old 1:72 Defender from Arii (and later Bandai) also only has a red box, even though under a clear cover, which is IMHO dubious, though. The louvres were created from hemispherical styrene profile bits, the sensor array was scratched with a front wheel from an 1:100 VF-1 and more styrene bits.
The guns/arms were taken OOB, but I reduced the opening at the shoulder (and with it the angle the arms can be swiveled) with styrene profile material, which also hides the foo fit of the shoulder halves that hold the guns and a reinforcement styrene plate inside of them.
While I could have enlarged the ammunition boxes on the Defender’s shoulders (they are extended backwards), I left them in the original and OOB configuration. Another hull mod I eventually did not carry out were clear replacements for the molded searchlights. Having some visible depth and true clear covers would have been nice, but then I doubted the benefits vs. the mess their integration into the body would mean, so that I went for a simple paint solution (see below).
A final cosmetic modification tried to improve the look of the shanks – but it did not help much. On the Defender, there are two continuous ridges that run across the lower legs. This is a molding simplification and wrong because the Defender (and all other 04-Series chassis’) only features the ends of the ridges.
I tried to sand the inner sections away, but upon gluing the parts finally together I realized that the fit of these parts is abysmal, and PSRing on the resulting concave surface between the leftover humps was a nightmare. Did not work well, and it looks poor.
With this in mind, a general word about the Arii 1:100 Destroids with the Series 04 chassis: there are three kits (Defender, Tomahawk and Phalanx), and you’d expect that these used the same lower body just with different torsos. But that’s not the case – they are all different, and the Defender is certainly the worst version, with its odd “toe” construction, the continuous ridges and the horrible fit of the lower leg halves as well as the shoulders that hold the stub arms. The Tomahawk is better, but also challenging, and IMHO, when you are only looking for the lower body section, the Phalanx is the best kit or the trio.
Painting and markings:
This Defender was supposed to remain canonical and close to the OOB finish, so this became a simple affair.
All Macross Destroids tend to carry a uniform livery, and esp. the Tomahawk/Defender/Phalanx family is kept in murky/dull tones of green, brown and ochre: unpretentious "mud movers".
The Defender appears to carry an overall olive drab livery, and I settled on RAL 7008 (Khakigrau), which is - according to the RAL color list - supposed to be a shade of grey, but it comes out as a dull, yellowish green-brown.
This tone was applied overall from a rattle can, and the few contrast sections like the ammunition boxes or the dust guards of the knee joints were painted with NATO olive green (RAL 6014, Gelboliv, Revell 46). The hull was later treated with Modelmaster Olive Drab (FS 34087), which adds a more greenish hue to the basic paint.
The kit received a thorough black ink washing, then some dry-brushing with Humbrol 72 (Khaki Drill) was applied. The decals came next, taken from the OOB sheet, plus four decals for those vernier thrusters that had not been molded into the kit’s surface. The only change is a different piece of “nose art” on the left leg, replacing the original, rather small decal. It actually belongs to a Czech AF MiG-21MF (one of the two famous Fishbeds from Pardubice in 1989, aircraft “1114”) and filled the bumpy area over the lower leg’s seam (see above) well – a kind of visual distraction from the PSR mess underneath...
Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish, its major sub-assemblies put together. The optical sensors received lenses with clear paint over a silver base. The large searchlights were painted, too, with a silver base plus white and clear blue reflections on top, covered with a generous coat of Humbrol’s Clearfix to mimic a clear, glossy cover.
After final assembly, some mineral pigments were dusted onto the model’s lower areas with a soft, big brush.
I knew that the Defender was trouble, but esp. the legs turned out to be horrible to build. However, the small cosmetic changes really improve the model’s look, and I am quite happy with the result.
I have used a circular cutter to make 180 degree cuts in 0.040 inch styrene sheet for a couple of tunnel portals that I will install on my N scale model railroad. The cutter is made by Olfa, and I purchased it at a local art supply store rather than a hobby shop that sells train stuff. Art supply stores sell lots of tools, paints, craft items, and materials useful to a model railroader. The circular cutter has a strong, sharp compass point that is mounted on a sturdy head which has an adjustment screw. By loosening the screw, a horizontal beam can slide in or out a variable distance from the center point and then be locked down at the desired distance. The replaceable cutting blade (held into place by another screw) is mounted on the horizontal beam.
Nobody makes an N scale tunnel portal the size and shape that I want, so I had to cut my own. The tunnel opening has a radius of 8 ½ scale feet from the track center line, so that is what I set on my circular cutter. The straight vertical dimension for each side is 20 scale feet above the top on the rails plus another 3 feet for the height of the rails, crossties, and roadbed. Both of the vertical sides have to be exactly tangent to the semicircle above, so determining where to position my straight edge for the first side was the trickiest part of the whole project. From that line, I used a steel drafting triangle (also purchased from the art supply store) to place the cutting point and center compass point. I swung a 180 degree arc to locate the position of the other vertical side. My N scale ruler (shown here) is 10 scale feet wide, so my first vertical cut was 10 scale feet from the edge of the styrene sheet. After the circular cut and both vertical cuts were completely through the plastic, I could easily remove the excess from each side.
Figuring the geometry of where to position my circular cutter and the straight edge to guide my razor blade required a lot of thought before doing any of the actual cutting. Once I began cutting, I had to be careful to keep my blades in the right places, but the cutting itself was very repetitive and time consuming. Each tunnel portal required an hour or two of MANY short, little cuts before I broke through the plastic sheet. Then there was sanding to smooth it out and trimming the overall piece to fit the future mountain that I haven’t built yet. This photo shows the positioning of the circular cutter, but I took the photo after the job was done (and my nails repainted). For all this cutting, I used my Dupli-Cutter to hold my work in place. The Dupli-Cutter has clamps that can be positioned in several places, an adjustable slide sheet held down by the clamps, and a frame whose jaws can be opened up to hold various thicknesses of plastic for making precise, square cuts.
+++ 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 Korean People's Army Air and Anti-Air Force began as the "Korean Aviation Society" in 1945. It was organized along the lines of flying clubs in the Soviet Union. In 1946, the society became a military organization and became an aviation division of the Korean People's Army (KPA). It became a branch of the army in its own right in November 1948. The KPAF incorporated much of the original Soviet air tactics, as well as North Korean experience from the UN bombings during the Korean War.
North Korea’s first indigenous jet fighter aircraft, the Wonsan Aircraft Works 여-1 (known as “W-1” outside of the country), started its existence in China as the Shenyang J-3 (Jianjiji = fighter). The J-3 was a project to exploit the knowledge and hardware gained through the license production of the Soviet MiG-15UTI trainer, locally designated JJ-2 (Jianjiji Jiaolianji – fighter trainer), a study that was primarily intended to improve China’s aircraft industry and the country’s respective engineering know how after the Korean War. The Soviet VVS and PVO had been the primary users of the MiG-15 during the Korean war, but not the only ones; it was also used by the PLAAF and KPAF (known as the United Air Army).
The J-3 was designed during the Korean War between 1952 and 1953 and two prototypes were built with Soviet help and tested in 1953, but the aircraft came too late – and it was not regarded as a successor or even an alternative to the Soviet MiG-15, because it lacked modern features like swept wings. The J-3’s design drew more on American rather than British inspiration, having elected to use features such as a very thin (but almost straight) wing akin to the Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star and a basic configuration comparable to the North American F-86 Sabre. Due to its conceptual interceptor role, an emphasis had been placed on a fast rate of climb. Power came from a Klimov VK-1 centrifugal-flow turbojet, a derivative of the British Rolls-Royce Nene Mk.104B that also powered the MiG-15. Armament consisted of four 23 mm (0.906 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 autocannon under the nose.
The J-3’s rate of progress on the project was such that, within 15 months of design work having formally started, the first prototype had been fully constructed. On 28 October 1953, the first J-3 fighter prototype conducted its first flight, even though it still lacked pressurization, armament, and other military equipment. Gradually, new hardware was integrated and tested, and a second aircraft joined the tests in January 1954. Flight tests followed quickly and showed that the J-3 was easy to fly and had exceptional performance and maneuverability for a straight-wing aircraft. Unfortunately, it soon became clear that the laminar flow section used for the original tail unit was totally unsuitable, with extremely severe buffeting setting in at 500 km/h (310 mph). The buffeting was so bad that the test pilots were thrown about in the cockpit, banging their head on the canopy, and the needles fell off all the flight instruments. Fortunately, accidents could be avoided, and the tailplane section was changed with much improved results.
The gun armament caused troubles, too. Firing all four NS-23 at once made the robust engine surge – a problem that did not occur on the MiG-15, but it only carried two of these weapons. A remedy was eventually found through the introduction of a slightly elongated nose that kept the air intake further away from the gun blast shock waves. The flight and test program lasted until 1955, and a total of five J-3 prototypes were built, but with no serious plan to put this aircraft into series production, even more so after China had been offered to produce the even more modern and capable Soviet MiG-17 fighter under license as the J-5. In the People's Republic of China (PRC), an initial MiG-17F was assembled from parts in 1956, with license production following in 1957 at Shenyang. The Chinese-built version was/is known as the Shenyang J-5 (for local use) or F-5 (for export). After this decision, the J-3 program was stopped, but the machines were retained in flightworthy condition as testbeds and chase planes by the PLAAF until the late Sixties
However, this was not the end of the J-3. After fighting had ended on 27 July 1953 when the Korean Armistice Agreement was signed, the Korean People's Army Air and Anti-Air Force (KPAAF) was keen to boost its capabilities and build a domestic aircraft industry, beyond the option to produce existing designs in license. Turning to its main sponsor China, North Korea was offered the plans for the J-3 and its tools, together with a supply of Chinese-built VK-1 engines. Even though the J-3 did not represent the state-of-the-art in jet fighters anymore, it was the best option for an industrial quickstart and until 1956 a dedicated production site for the J-3 was built at Wonsan, leading to the Wonsan Aircraft Works (Wonsan hang-gong-gi jag-eob , 원산 항공기 작업) and its first military product, the 여-1 (Yeo-1 = W-1). When NATO became aware of the aircraft it received the reporting code name “Freshman”.
However, despite the J-3’s plans and tools at hand, the W-1’s production was hampered by the lack of experience, sub-optimal materials, and poor logistics (esp. concerning vital imported components like the Chinese WP-5 engine, a license-built VK-1). Consequently, it took almost three years to roll out the first pre-serial production aircraft in 1959, and even then, the W-1 was plagued with material and reliability problems. Furthermore, once the W-1 became operational in 1961, the aircraft had become outdated. The W-1 had been designed to intercept straight-and-level-flying enemy bombers, not for air-to-air combat (dogfighting) with other fighters. The subsonic (Mach .76) fighter was effective against slower (Mach .6-.8), heavily loaded U.S. fighter-bombers from the Fifties, as well as the mainstay American strategic bombers during the aircraft's development cycle (such as the Boeing B-50 Superfortress or Convair B-36 Peacemaker, which were both still powered by piston engines). It was not however able to intercept the new generation of British jet bombers such as the Avro Vulcan and Handley Page Victor, which could both fly higher. Most W-1s were initially used as night fighters – even though they lacked any on-board radar and the pilot had to rely on visual contact and/or radio guidance from ground stations to make out and close in on a potential target. The USAF's introduction of strategic bombers capable of supersonic dash speeds such as the B-58 Hustler and General Dynamics FB-111 rendered the W-1 totally obsolete in front-line KPAAF service, and they were quickly supplanted by supersonic interceptors such as the MiG-21 and MiG-23.
The rugged aircraft was not retired, though, and found use as ground attack aircraft (despite its limited payload of around 2 tons) and as an advanced fighter trainer. Total production numbers are uncertain, but less than 100 W-1s were produced until 1969, with no further variants becoming known. In 1990, probably forty were still operational, and even after 2000 some KPAAF W-1s were still flying.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 10.73 m (35 ft 2 in)
Wingspan: 12.16 m (39 ft 10½ in)
Height: 4.46 m (14 ft 7½ in)
Wing area: 23.8 m² (256 sq ft)
Aspect ratio: 7.3
Empty weight: 4,142 kg (9,132 lb)
Gross weight: 7,404 kg (16,323 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 7,900 kg (17,417 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Wopen WP-5 (Rolls-Royce Nene Mk.104B) centrifugal-flow turbojet
with 26.5 kN (5,950 lbf) thrust
Performance:
Maximum speed: 940 km/h (580 mph, 510 kn) at sea level
Maximum speed: Mach 0.76
Cruise speed: 750 km/h (470 mph, 400 kn)
Maximum Mach number: M0.83
Combat range: 450 km (280 mi, 240 nmi)
Ferry range: 920 km (570 mi, 500 nmi)
Service ceiling: 13,000 m (43,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 38 m/s (7,500 ft/min)
Take-off run: 783 m (2,569 ft)
Landing run: 910 m (2,986 ft)
Armament:
4× 23 mm (0.906 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 autocannon with 100 rounds per gun
2× underwing hardpoints for 2.000 kg of payload, including a variety of unguided iron bombs such
as 2× 250 kg (500 lb) bombs, napalm tanks, pods with unguided missiles, or 2× 350 l (92 US
gal; 77 imp gal) drop tanks for extended range.
The kit and its assembly:
I always thought that the tubby Dassault Ouragan had something “Soviet-ish” about it, looking much like one of the obscure early Yakowlew jet fighter prototypes (e .g. the straight-wing Yak-25 [first use of this designation in 1947] or the swept-wing Yak-30) around 1950. With this idea I had stashed away a Heller Ouragan for a while, and recently wondered about an indigenous North-Korean aircraft that could have emerged after the Korean War? The Ouragan looked like a good basis, and so this project started as a simple conversion of the Heller kit.
While most of the airframe was retained, I made some cosmetic changes to change the aircraft’s looks and add a Warsaw Pact flavor. The characteristic wing tip tanks disappeared, and the wings’ ends were rounded off. The fin tip was extended with a piece of 1.5 mm styrene sheet and a different fin shape was sculpted from it. The original stabilizers were replaced with what I think are stabilizers from a VEB Plasticart 1:100 An-24 – they better match the wing shape than the OOB parts!
The cockpit was taken OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat with a different piece from a KP 1:72 MiG-19. The air intake was modified with the opening from a Heller 1:72 F-84G, extending and narrowing it slightly, even though the internal splitter plate (which also bears the front wheel well) was retained. The landing gear was also basically taken OOB, but the main wheels were now mounted on the outside position (with an adaptation of the covers), and the front wheel was moved 3 mm further forward, to compensate for the slightly longer nose section, and its cover was modified accordingly. The flaps were lowered, primarily because this modification is easy to realize on this kit and it makes the simple aircraft look “livelier”, and the canopy was cut into three parts for open display.
Pylons were added under the wings, together with drop tanks from a Hobby Boss 1:72 MiG-15. The same source provided the swept antenna mast behind the cockpit and the small but characteristic altimeter sensors under the wings. As a final twist of “Sovietization” I added small fences to the wings, made from styrene profiles – they would not be necessary on the aircraft’s straight wings, but they help change the model’s overall look. 😉
Building the Heller Ouragan was a straightforward affair, even though the plastic of the recent re-boxing I used was pretty soft and took long to cure after gluing parts together. A real problem occurred when I tried to close the fuselage halves, though, because the parts did not align well behind the cockpit, as if they were warped? The walls were rather thin, too, and as a result a lot of PSR went into the spine and the ventral area behind the wings, which mismatched badly. The rather thin material in these areas did not help much, either. I have built the Ouragan before, and I do not remember these massive troubles?!
Painting and markings:
I initially considered a North-Korean night fighter camouflage from the Korea War, but since the aircraft would have been introduced into service after the open hostilities, I rather settled for a very dry NMF finish with minimal markings. Therefore, the model received an overall coat with “White Aluminum” from the rattle can and a light overall rubbing treatment with graphite to emphasize the raised panel lines and add a slightly irregular metallic shine to the paint. Since they had disappeared through PSR, I also added/recreated some panel lines with a soft pencil.
The cockpit interior was painted in medium grey and Soviet cockpit turquoise, the landing gear and its wells became metallic-grey (Humbrol 56). The areas around the exhaust and the guns were painted with Revell 91 (Iron), the only color contrasts are red trim tabs.
The large KPAAF roundels with a white background came from a Cutting Edge MiG-15 sheet, the large red tactical code was left over from an unidentifiable “Eastern Bloc” model’s decal sheet. After some more graphite treatment around the guns and the tail section the model was sealed with a coat of semi-gloss acrylic varnish (Italeri), resulting in a nice metallic shine that looks better than expected on this uniform aircraft.
Well, this converted Ouragan looks pretty dull at first sight, due to its simple livery. But this makes it pretty plausible, and the small cosmetic changes add a serious Soviet-esque touch to the aircraft.
Type: Trading Figures (poseable).
Brand: Kaiyodo.
Name: Crabs.
Series: Capsule Q Museum.
Scale/Size: Non scale.
Material: Styrene plastic.
Release Date: Many years ago.
*Note: Pics not by us. It's just for reference.
These are trading figures collected by my BB or me.
More in My Collection Corner.
+++ 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 Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was the first jet fighter used operationally by the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) during World War II. Designed and built by Lockheed in 1943 and delivered just 143 days from the start of design, production models were flying, and two pre-production models did see very limited service in Italy just before the end of World War II. The XP-80 had a conventional all-metal airframe, with a slim low wing and tricycle landing gear. Like most early jets designed during World War II—and before the Allies captured German research data that confirmed the speed advantages of swept-wings—the XP-80 had straight wings similar to previous propeller-driven fighters, but they were relatively thin to minimize drag at high speed.
The Shooting Star began to enter service in late 1944 with 12 pre-production YP-80As. Four were sent to Europe for operational testing (demonstration, familiarization, and possible interception roles), two to England and two to the 1st Fighter Group at Lesina Airfield, Italy. Because of delays in delivery of production aircraft, the Shooting Star saw no actual combat during the conflict. The initial production order was for 344 P-80As after USAAF acceptance in February 1945. A total of 83 P-80s had been delivered by the end of July 1945 and 45 assigned to the 412th Fighter Group (later redesignated the 1st Fighter Group) at Muroc Army Air Field. Production continued after the war, although wartime plans for 5,000 were quickly reduced to 2,000 at a little under $100,000 each. A total of 1,714 single-seat F-80A, F-80B, F-80C, and RF-80s were manufactured by the end of production in 1950, of which 927 were F-80Cs (including 129 operational F-80As upgraded to F-80C-11-LO standards). However, the two-seat TF-80C, first flown on 22 March 1948, became the basis for the T-33 trainer, of which 6,557 were produced.
Shooting Stars first saw combat service in the Korean War, and were among the first aircraft to be involved in jet-versus-jet combat. Despite initial claims of success, the speed of the straight-wing F-80s was inferior to the 668 mph (1075 km/h) swept-wing transonic MiG-15. The MiGs incorporated German research showing that swept wings delayed the onset of compressibility problems, and enabled speeds closer to the speed of sound. F-80s were soon replaced in the air superiority role by the North American F-86 Sabre, which had been delayed to also incorporate swept wings into an improved straight-winged naval FJ-1 Fury.
This prompted Lockheed to improve the F-80 to keep the design competitive, and the result became the F-80E, which was almost a completely different aircraft, despite similar outlines. Lockheed attempted to change as little of the original airframe as possible while the F-80E incorporated two major technical innovation of its time. The most obvious change was the introduction of swept wings for higher speed. After the engineers obtained German swept-wing research data, Lockheed gave the F-80E a 25° sweep, with automatically locking leading edge slots, interconnected with the flaps for lateral stability during take-off and landing, and the wings’ profile was totally new, too. The limited sweep was a compromise, because a 35° sweep had originally been intended, but the plan to retain the F-80’s fuselage and wing attachment points would have resulted in massive center of gravity and mechanical problems. However, wind tunnel tests quickly revealed that even this compromise would not be enough to ensure stable flight esp. at low speed, and that the modified aircraft would lack directional stability. The swept-wing aircraft’s design had to be modified further.
A convenient solution came in the form of the F-80’s trainer version fuselage, the T-33, which had been lengthened by slightly more than 3 feet (1 m) for a second seat, instrumentation, and flight controls, under a longer canopy. Thanks to the extended front fuselage, the T-33’s wing attachment points could accept the new 25° wings without much further modifications, and balance was restored to acceptable limits. For the fighter aircraft, the T-33’s second seat was omitted and replaced with an additional fuel cell. The pressurized front cockpit was retained, together with the F-80’s bubble canopy and out fitted with an ejection seat.
The other innovation was the introduction of reheat for the engine. The earlier F-80 fighters were powered by centrifugal compressor turbojets, the F-80C had already incorporated water injection to boost the rather anemic powerplant during the start phase and in combat. The F-80E introduced a modified engine with a very simple afterburner chamber, designated J33-A-39. It was a further advanced variant of the J33-A-33 for the contemporary F-94 interceptor with water-alcohol injection and afterburner. For the F-80E with less gross weight, the water-alcohol injection system was omitted so save weight and simplify the system, and the afterburner was optimized for quicker response. Outwardly, the different engine required a modified, wider tail section, which also slightly extended the F-80’s tail.
The F-80E’s armament was changed, too. Experience from the Korean War had shown that the American aircrafts’ traditional 0.5” machine guns were reliable, but they lacked firepower, esp. against bigger targets like bombers, and even fighter aircraft like the MiG-15 had literally to be drenched with rounds to cause significant damage. On the other side, a few 23 mmm rounds or just a single hit with an explosive 37 mm shell from a MiG could take a bomber down. Therefore, the F-80’s six machine guns in the nose were replaced with four belt-fed 20mm M24 cannon. This was a license-built variant of the gas-operated Hispano-Suiza HS.404 with the addition of electrical cocking, allowing the gun to re-cock over a lightly struck round. It offered a rate of fire of 700-750 rounds/min and a muzzle velocity of 840 m/s (2,800 ft/s).In the F-80E each weapon was provided with 190 rounds.
Despite the swept wings Lockheed retained the wingtip tanks, similar to Lockheed’s recently developed XF-90 penetration fighter prototype. They had a different, more streamlined shape now, to reduce drag and minimize the risk of torsion problems with the outer wing sections and held 225 US gal (187 imp gal; 850 l) each. Even though the F-80E was conceived as a daytime fighter, hardpoints under the wings allowed the carriage of up to 2.000 lb of external ordnance, so that the aircraft could, like the straight-wing F-80s before, carry out attack missions. A reinforced pair of plumbed main hardpoints, just outside of the landing gear wells, allowed to carry another pair of drop tanks for extra range or single bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber. A smaller, optional pair of pylons was intended to carry pods with nineteen “Mighty Mouse” 2.75 inches (70 mm) unguided folding-fin air-to-air rockets, and further hardpoints under the outer wings allowed eight 5” HVAR unguided air-to-ground rockets to be carried, too. Total external payload (including the wing tip tanks) was 4,800 lb (roughly 2,200 kg) of payload
The first XP-80E prototype flew in December 1953 – too late to take part in the Korean War, but Lockheed kept the aircraft’s development running as the benefits of swept wings were clearly visible. The USAF, however, did not show much interest in the new aircraft since the proven F-86 Sabre was readily available and focus more and more shifted to radar-equipped all-weather interceptors armed with guided missiles. However, military support programs for the newly founded NATO, esp. in Europe, stoked the demand for jet fighters, so that the F-80E was earmarked for export to friendly countries with air forces that had still to develop their capabilities after WWII. One of these was Germany; after World War II, German aviation was severely curtailed, and military aviation was completely forbidden after the Luftwaffe of the Third Reich had been disbanded by August 1946 by the Allied Control Commission. This changed in 1955 when West Germany joined NATO, as the Western Allies believed that Germany was needed to counter the increasing military threat posed by the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies. On 9 January 1956, a new German Air Force called Luftwaffe was founded as a branch of the new Bundeswehr (Federal Defence Force). The first volunteers of the Luftwaffe arrived at the Nörvenich Air Base in January 1956, and the same year, the Luftwaffe was provided with its first jet aircraft, the US-made Republic F-84 Thunderstreak from surplus stock, complemented by newly built Lockheed F-80E day fighters and T-33 trainers.
A total of 43 F-80Es were delivered to Germany in the course of 1956 and early 1957 via freight ships as disassembled kits, initially allocated to WaSLw 10 (Waffenschule der Luftwaffe = Weapon Training School of the Luftwaffe) at Nörvenich, one of three such units which focused on fighter training. The unit was quickly re-located to Northern Germany to Oldenburg, an airfield formerly under British/RAF governance, where the F-80Es were joined by Canada-built F-86 Sabre Mk. 5s. Flight operations began there in November 1957. Initially supported by flight instructors from the Royal Canadian Air Force from Zweibrücken, the WaSLw 10’s job was to train future pilots for jet aircraft on the respective operational types. F-80Es of this unit were in the following years furthermore frequently deployed to Decimomannu AB on Sardinia (Italy), as part of multi-national NATO training programs.
The F-80Es’ service at Oldenburg with WaSLw 10 did not last long, though. In 1963, basic flight and weapon system training was relocated to the USA, and the so-called Europeanization was shifted to the nearby Jever air base, i. e. the training in the more crowded European airspace and under notoriously less pleasant European weather conditions. The remaining German F-80E fleet was subsequently allocated to the Jagdgeschwader 73 “Steinhoff” at Pferdsfeld Air Base in Rhineland-Palatinate, where the machines were – like the Luftwaffe F-86s – upgraded to carry AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs, a major improvement of their interceptor capabilities. But just one year later, on October 1, 1964, JG 73 was reorganized and renamed Fighter-Bomber Squadron 42, and the unit converted to the new Fiat G.91 attack aircraft. In parallel, the Luftwaffe settled on the F-86 (with more Sabre Mk. 6s from Canada and new F-86K all-weather interceptors from Italian license production) as standard fighter, with the plan to convert to the supersonic new Lockheed F-104 as standard NATO fighter as soon as the type would become available.
For the Luftwaffe the F-80E had become obsolete, and to reduce the number of operational aircraft types, the remaining German aircraft, a total of 34, were in 1965 passed through to the Türk Hava Kuvvetleri (Turkish air force) as part of international NATO military support, where they remained in service until 1974 and were replaced by third generation F-4E Phantom II fighter jets.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 36 ft 9 1/2 in (11.23 m)
Wingspan: 37 ft 6 in (11.44 m) over tip tanks
Height: 13 ft 5 1/4 in (4.10 m)
Wing area: 241.3 sq ft (22,52 m²)
Empty weight: 10,681 lb (4.845 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 18,464 lb (8.375 kg)
Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0134
Frontal area: 32 sq ft (3.0 m²)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-39 centrifugal compressor turbojet with 4,600 lbf (20 kN) dry thrust
and 27.0 kN (6,070 lbf) thrust with afterburning
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,060 km/h (660 mph, 570 kn)
Cruise speed: 439 mph (707 km/h, 381 kn)
Range: 825 mi (1,328 km, 717 nmi)
Ferry range: 1,380 mi (2,220 km, 1,200 nmi)
Service ceiling: 50,900 ft (15,500 m)
Rate of climb: 7,980 ft/min (40.5 m/s)
Time to altitude: 20,000 ft (6,100 m) in 4 minutes 50 seconds
Lift-to-drag: 17.7
Wing loading: 51.3 lb/sq ft (250 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.249 dry
0.328 with afterburner
Armament:
4× 0.79 in (20 mm) M24 cannon (190 rpg)
2x wing tip auxiliary tanks with 225 US gal (187 imp gal; 850 l) each
Underwing hardpoints for a total ordnance load of 4,800 lb (2.200 kg), including
2× 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs, up to 4× pods with nineteen unguided Mighty Mouse FFARs each,
and/or up to 8× 5” (127 mm) HVAR unguided air-to-ground rockets
The kit and its assembly:
The idea of a swept-wing F-80 had been lingering on my idea list for a while, and I actually tried this stunt before in the form of a heavily modified F-94. The recent “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers.com and a similar build by fellow forum member mat revived the interest in this topic – and inspired by mat’s creation, based on a T-33 fuselage, I decided to use the opportunity and add my personal interpretation of the idea.
Having suitable donor parts at hand was another decisive factor to start this build: I had a Heller T-33 in store, which had already been (ab)used as a donor bank for other projects, and which could now find a good use. I also had an F-80 canopy left over (from an Airfix kit), and my plan was to use Saab J29 wings (from a Matchbox kit) because of their limited sweep angle that would match the post-WWII era well.
Work started with the fuselage; it required a completely new cockpit interior because these parts had already gone elsewhere. I found a cockpit tub with its dashboard from an Italeri F4U, and with some trimming it could be mounted into the reduced cockpit opening, above the OOB front landing gear well. The T-33’s rear seat was faired of with styrene sheet and later PSRed away. The standard nose cone from the Heller T-33 was used, but I added gun ports for the new/different cannon armament.
For a different look with an afterburner engine I modified the tail section under the stabilizers, which was retained because of its characteristic shape. A generous section from the tail was cut away and replaced with the leftover jet pipe from an Italeri (R)F-84F, slightly longer and wider and decorated with innards from a Matchbox Mystère IV. This change is rather subtle but changes the F-80 profile and appears like a compromise between the F-80 and F-94 arrangements.
The T-33 wings were clipped down to the connection lower fuselage part. This ventral plate with integral main landing gear wells was mounted onto the T-33 hull and then the Saab 29 wings were dry-fitted to check their position along the fuselage and to define the main landing gear wells, which had to be cut into them to match their counterparts from the aircraft’s belly.
Their exact position was eventually fixed when the new swept stabilizers, taken from a Hobby Boss F-86, were mounted to the tail. They match well with the swept wings, and for an odd look I kept their dihedral.
The fin was eventually replaced, too – mat’s build retained the original F-80 fin, but with all other surfaces swept I found that the fin had to reflect this, too. So, I implanted a shortened Italeri (R)F-84F fin onto the original base, blended with some PSR into the rest of the tail.
With all aerodynamic surfaces in place it was time for fine-tuning, and to give the aircraft a simpler look I removed the dog teeth from the late Tunnan's outer wings, even though I retained the small LERXs. The wing tips were cut down a little and tip tanks (probably drop tanks from a Hobby Boss F-5E) added – without them the aircraft looked like a juvenile Saab 32!
The landing gear was mostly taken over from the Heller T-33, I just added small consoles for the main landing gear struts to ensure a proper stance, because the new wings and the respective attachment points were deeper. I also had to scratch some landing gear covers because the T-33 donor kit was missing them. The canopy was PSRed over the new opening and a new ejection seat tailored to fit into the F4U cockpit.
A final addition was a pair of pods with unguided FFARs. AFAIK the Luftwaffe did not use such weapons, but they’d make thematically sense on a Fifties anti-bomber interceptor - and I had a suitable pair left over from a Matchbox Mystère IV kit, complete with small pylons.
Painting and markings:
Since the time frame was defined by the Fifties, early Luftwaffe fighters had to carry a bare metal finish, with relatively few decorations. For the F-80E I gave the model an overall base coat with White Aluminum from a Dupli Color rattle can, a very nice and bright silver tone that comes IMHO close to NMF. Panels were post-shaded with Revell 99 (Aluminum) and 91 (Iron Metallic). An anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen was painted in the Luftwaffe tone RAL 6014, Gelboliv (Revell 42).
For some color highlights I gave the tip tanks bright red (Feuerrot, RAL 3000; Revell 330) outer halves, while the inner halves were painted black to avoid reflections that could distract the pilot (seen on a real Luftwaffe T-33 from the late Fifties). For an even more individual touch I added light blue (Tamiya X-14, Sky Blue) highlights on the nose and the fin, reflecting the squadron’s color code which is also carried within the unit emblem – the Tamiya paint came closest to the respective decal (see below).
The cockpit interior was painted with zinc chromate green primer (I used Humbrol 80, which is brighter than the tone should be, but it adds contrast to the black dials on the dashboard), the landing gear wells were painted with a mix of Humbrol 80 and 81, for a more yellowish hue. The landing gear struts became grey, dry-brushed with silver, while the inside of the ventral air brakes were painted in Feuerrot, too.
Then the model received an overall washing with black ink to emphasize the recessed panel lines, plus additional panel shading with Matt Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol 27001), plus a light rubbing treatment with grinded graphite that emphasized the (few leftover) raised panel lines and also added a dark metallic shine to the silver base. Some of the lost panel lines were simulated with simple pencil strokes, too.
The decals/markings primarily came from an AirDoc aftermarket sheet for late Fifties Luftwaffe F-84Fs. The tactical code (“BB-xxx” was then assigned to the WaSLw 10 as unit code, but this soon changed to a similar but different format that told about the unit’s task as well as the specific unit and squadron within it; this was replaced once more by a simple xx+yy code that was only connected to a specific aircraft with no unit reference anymore, and this format is still in use today) was puzzled together from single letters/digits from the same decal set. Some additional markings like the red band on the fuselage had to be scratched, but most stencils came from an all-bare-metal Luftwaffe F-84F.
After some more detail painting the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic paint, just the anti-glare panel and the di-electric fairings on the nose and the fin tip became matt.
A thorough kitbashing build, but the result looks quite plausible, if not elegant? The slightly swept wings suit the F-80 with its organic fuselage shape well, even though they reveal the designs rather baroque shape. There’s a sense of obsolescence about the F-80E, despite its modern features? The Luftwaffe markings work well on the aircraft, too, and with the red and blue highlights the machine looks more attractive despite its simple NMF livery than expected.
This is a kit from Design Preservation Models that they call the "Roadkill Cafe" that I built in the 1990's but didn't detail until recently. Originally I intended for it to be a small town hardware store. After I added my scratchbuilt one story hardware store to the town of Cimarron, I decided to make this a 5 & 10 store of some kind. Well into the 1960's various small 5 & 10 stores such as FW Woolworth, SS Kresge, T G & Y, and Ben Franklin were common, especially in small towns, but bigger ones served the cities. I made mine a Woolworth because they seemed to be better known, and I did shop there during my grade school years.
Online research indicates that most Woolworth locations used a lot of red trim and usually had red signs with gold letters. Unfortunately, the gold Microscale decals don't show up very well, so I may have to replace this sign later on. After painting the window trim, I added glazing and crude "interiors" cut out from catalogs. I couldn't find any retail interiors the right size, so I opted for colored printing that looks like curtains or floral displays. The trees are made from Woodland Scenics kits. The building is mounted on a styrene base that also includes my Grand Hotel to the right and an alley that leads to a small rear parking lot.
The car is a 1950 De Soto sedan from Mini Metals. You'll see more of those on my streets in the future.
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the fully functional VF-1 prototype (the VF-X-1).
Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be produced en masse within a short period of time, a total of 5,459 airframes were delivered until 2013. The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. From the start the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable and versatile craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.
The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements and upgrades, including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie, FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S with additional firepower. The FAST Pack system was designed to enhance the VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter, and the initial V1.0 came in the form of conformal pallets that could be attached to the fighter’s leg flanks for additional fuel – primarily for Long Range Interdiction tasks in atmospheric environment. Later FAST Packs were designed for space operations.
After the end of Space War I, production on Earth was stopped but the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and its persistent production after the war in many space sectors proved the lasting worth of the design.
The versatile aircraft underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems, placed in a small, streamlined fairing in front of the cockpit. This system allowed passive long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his/her position through active radar emissions. The sensor could also be used for target illumination and precision weapons guidance.
Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with sensor arrays mounted on the wingtips, the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures and other defensive measure like flare/chaff dispensers were also added to some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.
In early 2011, VF-1 production on Earth had already reached the 2.500th aircraft, a VF-1J which received a striking white-and-blue commemorative paint scheme upon roll-out, decorated with the logos of all major manufacturers and system suppliers. After a brief PR tour the machine (Bu. No. 2110406/1) was handed over to SVF-1, the famous Skull Squadron, as an attrition replacement for Major Yingluck 'Joker' Maneethapo's aircraft, leader of the unit’s 5th Flight and a Thai pilot ace from the first stages of the Zentraedi attacks in 2009.
With the opportunity to add more personal style to his new mount, Maneethapo's chose the non-standard modex ML 555 for his fighter - a play of words, because the five is pronounced 'ha' in Thai language and '555' a frequent abbreviation for 'laughing'. Bu. No. 2110406/1 retained its bright PR livery, because its primary colors matched well with SVF-1 ‘Lazulite’ flight’s ID color. The aircraft just lost the sponsor logos and instead received full military markings and tactical codes, including the unit’s renowned skull icon and the characteristic “ML” letter code on the foldable fins. The nose art for the 2.500th production VF-1 jubilee was retained, though.
In SVF-1 service, Bu. No. 2110406/1 was soon upgraded with an IRST and retrofitted with FAST Packs and avionics for various zero-G weapons for operations in space, since the unit was supposed to become based on SDF-1 and go into space with the large carrier ship. However, only SVF-1's Flight #1, 2 and 3 were taken on board of the SDF-1 when the ship left Earth, the remaining unit parts remained at the home base on Ataria Island, tasked with homeland defense duties.
In 2012, at the end of the war, SVF-1’s Lazulite’ flight was re-located on board of ARMD-02 (Armaments Rigged-up Moving Deck Space Carrier vessel), which was and rebuilt and attached to the refitted SDF-1 Macross as originally intended. There, Bu. No. 2110406/1 served into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013, when it was replaced as a Flight Leader’s mount by a VF-4 and handed over to SVF-42 back on Earth, where it was repainted in standard U.N. Spacy fighter colors (even though it still retained its commemorative nose art) and served until 2017. Bu. No. 2110406/1 was then retired and unceremoniously scrapped, having already exceeded its expected service life.
The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with several major variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30), sub-variants (VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68) and upgrades of existing airframes (like the VF-1P).
Despite its relatively short and intense production run the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness even years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!
General characteristics:
All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,
used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force and U.N.S. Marine Corps
Accommodation:
Pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat
Dimensions:
Fighter Mode:
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)
Height 3.84 meters
Battroid Mode:
Height 12.68 meters
Width 7.3 meters
Length 4.0 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons
MTOW: 37.0 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or 225.63 kN in overboost
4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip)
18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles
Performance:
Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h
Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87
g limit: in space +7
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Design Features:
3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system
Transformation:
Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.
Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.
Armament:
2x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 ppm
1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm
4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including…
12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or
12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or
6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or
4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,
or a combination of above load-outs
The kit and its assembly:
Another small and vintage 1:100 VF-1 Fighter. This time it’s a non-canonical aircraft, based on a limited edition decal sheet that was published with the Japanese Model Graphix magazine in April 2001 (check this here for reference: www.starshipmodeler.com/mecha/jl_clrvalk.htm) with Hasegawa’s first release of their 1:72 Valkyrie Fighter kit. The give-away sheet featured several VF-1s, including an anniversary paint scheme for the 2.500th production Valkyrie. This is AFAIK neither ‘official’ nor canonical – but the pretty blue-and-white livery caught my attention, and I had for a long time the plan to re-create this livery on one of my favored 1:100 models. This would not work 100%, though, so I had to improvise – see below.
The kit was built OOB, with the landing gear down and (after taking the flight scenic pictures) with an open canopy, mounted on a small lift arm. Some typical small blade antennae the 1:100 simple kit lacks were added around the hull as a standard measure to improve the look. In the cockpit I added side consoles and a pilot figure for the in-flight shots.
The only non-standard additions are the IRST sensor fairing in front of the cockpit – the model of the anniversary VF-1 in the Model Graphix magazine carries this canonical upgrade, too, it was created from clear sprue material. Another tiny addition were the RHAWS antenna fairings at the top of the fins, scratched from small styrene profile bits.
The Valkyrie’s ordnance is standard and was taken OOB, featuring twelve AMM-1 missiles under the wings plus the standard GU-11 gatling gun pod; the latter was modified to hold a scratched wire display for in-flight pictures at its rear end. The Model Graphix VF-1 is insofar confusing as it seems to carry something that looks like a white ACMI pod on a non-standard pylon, rather attached to the legs than to the wings? That's odd and I could not make up a useful function, so I rejected this detail. The magazine Valkyrie's belly drop tank was - even though canonical, AFAIK - also not taken over to my later in-service status.
Painting and markings:
The more challenging part of the build, in two ways. First, re-creating the original commemorative livery would have called for home-made decals printed in opaque white for the manufacturers’ logos, something I was not able to do at home. So, I had to interpret the livery in a different way and decided to spin the aircraft’s story further: what would become of this VF-1 after its roll-out and PR event? In a war situation it would certainly be delivered quickly to a frontline unit, and since I had some proper markings left over, I decided to attach this colorful bird to the famous Skull Squadron, SVF-1, yet to a less glorious Flight. Since flight leaders and aces in the Macross universe would frequently fly VF-1s in individual non-standard liveries, sometimes even very bright ones, the 2,500th VF-1 could have well retained its catchy paint scheme.
The second part of the challenge: the actual paint job. Again, no suitable decals were at hand, so I had to re-create everything from scratch. The VF-1J kit I used thankfully came molded in white styrene, so that the front half of the aircraft could be easily painted in white, with no darker/colored plastic shining through. I painted the white (Revell 301, a very pure white) with a brush first. For the blue rear half, I settled upon an intense and deep cobalt blue tone (ModelMaster 2012). For the zigzag border between the colors, I used Tamiya masking tape, trimmed with a tailor’s zigzag scissors and applied in a slightly overlapping pattern for an irregular edge.
The landing gear became standard all-white (Revell 301, too), with bright red edges (Humbrol 174) on the covers. Antenna fairings were painted with radome tan (Humbrol 7) as small color highlights.
The cockpit interior became standard medium grey (Revell 47) with a black ejection seat with brown cushions (Humbrol 119 and Revell 84), and brown “black boxes” behind the headrest. The air intakes as well as the interior of the VG wings were painted dark grey (Revell 77). The jet nozzles/feet were internally painted with Humbrol 27003 (Steel Metallizer) and with Revell 91 on the outside, and they were later thoroughly treated with graphite to give them a burnt/worn look.
The GU-11 pod became standard bare metal (Revell 91, Iron metallic), the AMM-1s were painted in light grey (Humbrol 127) with many additional painted details in five additional colors, quite a tedious task when repeated twelve times...
After basic painting was one the model received a careful overall washing with black ink to emphasize the engraved panel lines, and light post-shading was done to the blue areas to emphasize single panels.
The full-color ’kite’ roundels came from an 1:100 VF-1A sheet, the skull emblems were left over from my Kotobukiya 1:72 VF-4 build some years ago, which OOB carries SVF-1 markings, too. The 2.500th aircraft nose art decoration was printed on clear decal film with an ink jet printer at home, even though it’s so small that no details can be discerned on the model. SVF-1’s “ML” tail code was created with single white decal letters (RAF WWII font), the red “555” modex came from an PrintScale A-26 Invader sheet, it's part of a USAF serial number from an all-black Korean War era aircraft.
The wings' leading edges were finished in medium grey, done with decal sheet material. The Model Graphix Valkyrie does not sport this detail, but I think that the VF-1 looks better with them and more realistic. Red warning stripes around the legs - also not seen on the model in the magazine - were made from similar material.
The confetti along the jagged edge between the white and the blue areas was created with decal material, too – every bit was cut out and put into place one for one… To match the cobalt blue tone, the respective enamel paint was applied on clear decal sheet material and cut into small bits. For the white and red confetti, generic decal sheet material was used. All in all, this was another tedious process, but, at the small 1:100 scale, masks or tape would have been much more complex and less successful with the brushes I use for painting. For this home-made approach the result looks quite good!
Finally, after some typical details and position lights had been added with clear paints over a silver base, the small VF-1 was sealed with a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish, giving it a slightly shiny finish.
A pretty VF-1 – even though I’d call it purely fictional, despite being based on material that was published in a Japanese magazine more than 20 years ago. The simple yet striking livery was a bit tricky to create, but the result, with the additional SVF-1 unit markings, looks good and makes me wonder how this machine would look with FAST pack elements for use in space or as a transformed Battroid?
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
After the division of Czechoslovakia by Germany in 1939, Slovakia was left with a small air force composed primarily of Czechoslovak combat aircraft. This force defended Slovakia against Hungary in March 1939, in the Slovak–Hungarian War in March 1939 in which Hungary reoccupied Carpathian Ruthenia and parts of southern Slovakia. In this the SVZ suffered some losses against Royal Hungarian Air Force. Later, the SVZ also took part in the German Invasion of Poland. The SVZ took part in Axis offensives in the Ukraine and Russian Central front sectors of the Eastern Front under the lead of Luftwaffe in the Stalingrad and Caucasus operations. This engagement resulted in great losses of aircraft and personnel, though.
During the World War II, the Slovak Air force was charged with the defense of Slovak airspace, and, after the invasion of Russia, provided air cover for Slovak forces fighting against the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front. For the rest of the war the SVZ fought US Army Air Forces and Royal Air Force raids against Slovakia.
Among the many more or less outdated German aircraft types inherited from the Luftwaffe during the early stages of WWII was a small number of Hs 123 A-1 dive bombers. The Henschel Hs 123 was a small single-seat biplane dive bomber and close-support attack aircraft. The aircraft was designed to meet the 1933 dive bomber requirements for the reborn Luftwaffe. Both Henschel and rival Fieseler (with the Fi 98) competed for the production contract requirement, which specified a single-seat biplane dive bomber. The first prototype, the Hs 123 V1, was cleared for its maiden flight on 1 April 1935; General Ernst Udet, a World War I ace, flew it on its first public demonstration flight on 8 May 1935. The first three Henschel prototypes, with the first and third powered by 485 kW (650 hp) BMW 132A-3 engines and the second by a 574 kW (770 hp) Wright Cyclone, were tested at Rechlin in August 1936. Only the first prototype had "smooth" cowlings; from that point on, all aircraft had a tightly fitting, characteristic cowling that included 18 fairings covering the engine valves. The Henschel prototypes did away with bracing wires and although they looked slightly outdated with their single faired interplane struts and cantilever main landing gear legs attached to smaller (stub) lower wings, the Hs 123 featured an all-metal construction, clean lines and superior maneuverability. Its biplane wings were of a "sesquiplane" configuration, whereby the lower wings were significantly smaller than the top wings.
The overall performance of the Hs 123 V1 prototype prematurely eliminated any chance for the more conventional Fi 98, which was cancelled after a sole prototype had been constructed. During testing, the Hs 123 proved capable of pulling out of "near-vertical" dives; however, two prototypes subsequently crashed due to structural failures in the wings that occurred when the aircraft were tested in high-speed dives. The fourth prototype incorporated improvements to cure these problems; principally, stronger center-section struts were fitted. After it had been successfully tested, the Hs 123 was ordered into production with a 656 kW (880 hp) BMW 132Dc engine.
The Hs 123 was intended to replace the Heinkel He 50 biplane reconnaissance and dive bomber as well as acting as a "stop-gap" measure until the more modern and capable Junkers Ju 87 became available. As such, production was limited and no upgrades were considered, although an improved version, the Hs 123B, was developed by Henschel in 1938. A proposal to fit the aircraft with a more powerful 716 kW (960 hp) "K"-variant of its BMW 132 engine did not proceed beyond the prototype stage, the Hs 123 V5. The V6 prototype fitted with a similar powerplant and featuring a sliding cockpit hood was intended to serve as the Hs 123C prototype.
About 265 aircraft were produced and production of the Hs 123A ended in Autumn 1938. It was flown by the German Luftwaffe during the Spanish Civil War and the early to midpoint of World War II. At the outbreak of hostilities, Hs 123s were committed to action in the Polish Campaign. Screaming over the heads of enemy troops, the Hs 123s delivered their bombs with devastating accuracy. A frightening aspect of an Hs 123 attack was the staccato noise of its engine that a pilot could manipulate by changing rpm to create "gunfire-like" bursts. The Hs 123 proved rugged and able to take a lot of damage and still keep on flying. Operating from primitive bases close to the front lines, the type was considered by ground crews to be easy to maintain, quick to re-equip and reliable even under dire field conditions.
The Polish campaign was a success for an aircraft considered obsolete by the Luftwaffe high command. Within a year, the Hs 123 was again in action in the Blitzkrieg attacks through the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Often positioned as the Luftwaffe's most-forward based combat unit, the Hs 123s flew more missions per day than other units, and again proved their worth in the close-support role. With Ju 87s still being used as tactical bombers rather than true ground support aircraft and with no other aircraft capable of this mission in the Luftwaffe arsenal the Hs 123 was destined to continue in service for some time, although numbers were constantly being reduced by attrition.
The Hs 123 was not employed in the subsequent Battle of Britain as the English Channel proved an insuperable obstacle for the short-ranged aircraft, and the sole leftover operator, II.(Schl)/LG 2, went back to Germany to re-equip with the Messerschmitt Bf 109E fighter bomber (Jabo) variant. The Bf 109E fighter bomber was not capable of carrying any more bombs than the Hs 123. It did, however, have a greater range and was far more capable of defending itself. On the downside were the notoriously tricky taxiing, ground handling, and takeoff/landing characteristics of the Bf 109, which were exacerbated with a bomb load.
At the beginning of the Balkans Campaign, the 32 examples of the Hs 123 that had been retired after the fall of France were taken back into service and handed over to the Slovak Air Force to replace the heavy losses on the Eastern Front after combat fatigue and desertion had reduced the pilots' effectiveness. Most of Slovakia's obsolete biplanes were replaced with modern German combat aircraft, including the Messerschmitt Bf 109, so that the Hs 123s were initially regarded with distrust – but the machines proved their worth in the ensuing battles. The Slovak Hs 123s took part in the Battle of Kursk and supported ground troops, some were outfitted with locally designed ski landing gears which proved to be a very effective alternative to the Hs 123’s spatted standard landing gear which was prone to collect snow and mud and even block. After this deployment at the Russian front, the Slovak Air Force was sent back to defend Slovak home air space, primarily executed with Messerschmitt Bf 109 E and G types, Avia B-534, and some other interceptor types, also helped by Luftwaffe units active in the area.
Being confined to national borders, the Slovak Hs 123s were put in reserve and relegated to training purposes, even though they were occasionally activated to support German ground troops. From late August 1944 the remaining Hs 123s also actively took part in the suppression of the Slovak National Uprising against Germany.
Since Hs 123 production had already stopped in 1940 and all tools had been destroyed, the permanent attritions could not be replaced - due to a lack of serviceable airframes and spare parts the type’s numbers dwindled. When Romania and the Soviet Union entered Slovakia, they organized with some captured aircraft and defectors a local Insurgent Air Force to continue the fight against Axis forces in country, including the last operational Slovak Hs 123s. No aircraft survived the war.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 8.33 m (27 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 10.5 m (34 ft 5 in)
Height: 3.2 m (10 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 24.85 m² (267.5 sq ft)
Empty weight: 1,500 kg (3,307 lb)
Gross weight: 2,215 kg (4,883 lb)
Powerplant:
1× BMW 132Dc 9-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine with 660 kW (880 hp),
driving a 2-bladed metal variable-pitch propeller
Performance:
Maximum speed: 341 km/h (212 mph, 184 kn) at 1,200 m (3,937 ft)
Range: 860 km (530 mi, 460 nmi) with a 100 l drop tank
Combat range: 480 km (300 mi, 260 nmi) with 200 kg (440.9 lb) of bombs
Service ceiling: 9,000 m (30,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 15 m/s (3,000 ft/min)
Armament:
2× 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns, 400 rpg
Up to 450 kg (992.1 lb) of bombs under fuselage and wings
The kit and its assembly:
A relatively simple what-if project, and it took a while to figure out something to do with a surplus Airfix Hs 123 A kit in The Stash™ without a proper plan yet. The Hs 123 is an overlooked aircraft, and the fact that all airframes were used during WWII until none was left makes a story in Continental Europe a bit difficult. I also did not want to create a German aircraft – Finland was an early favorite, because I wanted to add a ski landing gear (see below), but since I won’t build anything with a swastika on it this option was a dead end. Then I considered an operator from the Balkans, e. g. Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia or Slovakia – and eventually settled for the latter because of the national markings.
The kit was built almost OOB, and the Airfix Hs 123 is a nice offering. Yes, it’s a simple kit, but its is IMHO a very good representation, despite the many rivets on the hull, a rather bleak interior and some sinkholes (e. g. on the massive outer wings struts). It goes together well, just a little PSR here and there. I just added a dashboard (scratched from styrene sheet) and modified the OOB 50 kg bombs with extended impact fuzes with a flat, round plate at the tip, so that the bomb itself explodes above soft ground or snow for a bigger blast radius.
The only major modification is a transplanted ski landing gear from a PM Model (Finnish) Fokker D.XXI, which had to be reduced in length to fit under the compact Hs 123. A small tail ski/skid was scratched from styrene sheet material.
Thankfully, the Hs 123 only calls for little rigging – just between the central upper wing supports and there is a characteristic “triangle” wiring in the cowling. All these, together with the wire antenna, were created with heated sprue material.
Painting and markings:
Finland had been a favorite because I would have been able to apply a more interesting paint scheme than the standard Luftwaffe RLM 70/71/65 splinter scheme with a low waterline that was typical for the Hs 123 during WWII. However, as a former Luftwaffe aircraft I retained this livery but decided to add a winter camouflage as a suitable thematic supplement to the skis.
The basic colors became Humbrol 65 underneath and 30 and 75 from above – the latter for a stronger contrast to the Dunkelgrün than Humbrol 91 (Schwarzgrün). Thanks to the additional whitewash mottles, which were inspired by a similar livery seen on a contemporary Bulgarian Avia B.534, I did not have to be too exact with the splinter camouflage.
The cockpit and cowling interior were painted with RLM 02 (Humbrol 240), the propeller blades became Schwarzgrün (Humbrol 91, further darkened with some black) and the bombs were painted in a dark grey (Revell 77) while the small 100 l drop tank became bare aluminum (Revell 99).
However, before the white mottles could be added, the kit received its decals so that they could be painted around the markings, just as in real life. The Slovak national markings had to be scratched, and I used standard white simplified German Balkenkreuze over a cross made from blue decal stripes. Later a separate red decal circle was placed on top of that. The only other markings are the red “7” codes, edged in white for better contrast (from a Heller Bf 109 K) and the fuel information triangles on the fuselage from the Hs 123’s OOB sheet. As an ID marking for an Eastern Front Axis aircraft, I retained the wide yellow fuselage stripe from the OOB, sheet, too, and added yellow tips on the upper wings’ undersides.
The whitewash camouflage was then created with white acrylic paint (Revell 05), applied with a soft brush with a rounded tip. Once this had dried, I treated the surfaces with fine wet sandpaper for a weathered/worn look.
Finally, after some soot stains behind the exhausts and around the machine gun nozzles, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and the rigging (see above) was done.
The Hs 123 might not be the sexiest aircraft of WWII, but I like this rugged pug which could not be replaced by its successor, the Ju 87, and served in its close support role until literally no aircraft was left. Putting one on skis worked quite well, and the exotic Slovak markings add a special touch – even though the national markings almost disappear among the disruptive whitewash camouflage! The result looks quite plausible, though, and the old Airfix kit is IMHO really underestimated.
Europe’s first 3D printer designed for use in weightlessness, printing aerospace-quality plastics, has won the prestigious Aerospace Applications Award from design-to-manufacturing specialist TCT Magazine.
ESA’s Manufacturing of Experimental Layer Technology (MELT) project printer has to be able to operate from any orientation – up, down or sideways – in order to serve in microgravity conditions aboard the International Space Station. Based on the ‘fuse filament fabrication’ process, it has been designed to fit within a standard ISS payload rack, and to meet the Station’s rigorous safety standards.
The MELT printer can print a wide variety of thermoplastics from ABS (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene), as used in Lego, up to high-melting point engineering thermoplastics such PEEK (Polyether ether ketone), which is robust enough to substitute for metal materials in some cases.
“This printer could be used to make parts on demand for the repair and maintenance of a long-duration orbital habitat,” explains ESA materials and processes engineer Ugo Lafont. “This printer would also benefit human bases on planetary surfaces. Crucially, it can also print using recycled plastics, allowing a whole new maintenance strategy based on closed-loop reuse of materials.”
The printer was produced for ESA by a consortium led by Sonaca Space GmbH together with BeeVeryCreative, Active Space Techologies SA and OHB-System AG.
The MELT project was supported through ESA’s Technology Development Element programme, which identifies promising technologies for space, then demonstrates their workability.
Watch a video of the printer in operation here.
Credits: ESA–G. Porter, CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO
I photographed this scene on the Bayou City & Gulf RR to give me some ideas about building a small stockyard for my model railroad. This model railroad in located in the back room of Houston's best hobby shop, Papa Ben's. I have been a customer of Papa Ben's even since he opened in 2002. That layout is open to the public most Saturday afternoons.
The stockyard I am planning on building will be based on a Santa Fe Railway prototype and will measure 65' x 65' scale feet. That is assuming I can get enough of the right scale lumber (in styrene strips) to construct the very delicate fences. This stockyard isn't completely accurate but has a good feel about it. Another modeler in Houston had several very good stockyards in N scale, but he got bored with his huge layout and tore it up. Oh well. Pictures on that layout plus another Santa Fe layout in HO scale with excellent stockyards are located in this same album for other modelers' work.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The OV-10 Bronco was initially conceived in the early 1960s through an informal collaboration between W. H. Beckett and Colonel K. P. Rice, U.S. Marine Corps, who met at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California, and who also happened to live near each other. The original concept was for a rugged, simple, close air support aircraft integrated with forward ground operations. At the time, the U.S. Army was still experimenting with armed helicopters, and the U.S. Air Force was not interested in close air support.
The concept aircraft was to operate from expedient forward air bases using roads as runways. Speed was to be from very slow to medium subsonic, with much longer loiter times than a pure jet. Efficient turboprop engines would give better performance than piston engines. Weapons were to be mounted on the centerline to get efficient aiming. The inventors favored strafing weapons such as self-loading recoilless rifles, which could deliver aimed explosive shells with less recoil than cannons, and a lower per-round weight than rockets. The airframe was to be designed to avoid the back blast.
Beckett and Rice developed a basic platform meeting these requirements, then attempted to build a fiberglass prototype in a garage. The effort produced enthusiastic supporters and an informal pamphlet describing the concept. W. H. Beckett, who had retired from the Marine Corps, went to work at North American Aviation to sell the aircraft.
The aircraft's design supported effective operations from forward bases. The OV-10 had a central nacelle containing a crew of two in tandem and space for cargo, and twin booms containing twin turboprop engines. The visually distinctive feature of the aircraft is the combination of the twin booms, with the horizontal stabilizer that connected them at the fin tips. The OV-10 could perform short takeoffs and landings, including on aircraft carriers and large-deck amphibious assault ships without using catapults or arresting wires. Further, the OV-10 was designed to take off and land on unimproved sites. Repairs could be made with ordinary tools. No ground equipment was required to start the engines. And, if necessary, the engines would operate on high-octane automobile fuel with only a slight loss of power.
The aircraft had responsive handling and could fly for up to 5½ hours with external fuel tanks. The cockpit had extremely good visibility for both pilot and co-pilot, provided by a wrap-around "greenhouse" that was wider than the fuselage. North American Rockwell custom ejection seats were standard, with many successful ejections during service. With the second seat removed, the OV-10 could carry 3,200 pounds (1,500 kg) of cargo, five paratroopers, or two litter patients and an attendant. Empty weight was 6,969 pounds (3,161 kg). Normal operating fueled weight with two crew was 9,908 pounds (4,494 kg). Maximum takeoff weight was 14,446 pounds (6,553 kg).
The bottom of the fuselage bore sponsons or "stub wings" that improved flight performance by decreasing aerodynamic drag underneath the fuselage. Normally, four 7.62 mm (.308 in) M60C machine guns were carried on the sponsons, accessed through large forward-opening hatches. The sponsons also had four racks to carry bombs, pods, or fuel. The wings outboard of the engines contained two additional hardpoints, one per side. Racked armament in the Vietnam War was usually seven-shot 2.75 in (70 mm) rocket pods with white phosphorus marker rounds or high-explosive rockets, or 5" (127 mm) four-shot Zuni rocket pods. Bombs, ADSIDS air-delivered/para-dropped unattended seismic sensors, Mk-6 battlefield illumination flares, and other stores were also carried.
Operational experience showed some weaknesses in the OV-10's design. It was significantly underpowered, which contributed to crashes in Vietnam in sloping terrain because the pilots could not climb fast enough. While specifications stated that the aircraft could reach 26,000 feet (7,900 m), in Vietnam the aircraft could reach only 18,000 feet (5,500 m). Also, no OV-10 pilot survived ditching the aircraft.
The OV-10 served in the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy, as well as in the service of a number of other countries. In U.S. military service, the Bronco was operated until the early Nineties, and obsoleted USAF OV-10s were passed on to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms for anti-drug operations. A number of OV-10As furthermore ended up in the hands of the California Department of Forestry (CDF) and were used for spotting fires and directing fire bombers onto hot spots.
This was not the end of the OV-10 in American military service, though: In 2012, the type gained new attention because of its unique qualities. A $20 million budget was allocated to activate an experimental USAF unit of two airworthy OV-10Gs, acquired from NASA and the State Department. These machines were retrofitted with military equipment and were, starting in May 2015, deployed overseas to support Operation “Inherent Resolve”, flying more than 120 combat sorties over 82 days over Iraq and Syria. Their concrete missions remained unclear, and it is speculated they provided close air support for Special Forces missions, esp. in confined urban environments where the Broncos’ loitering time and high agility at low speed and altitude made them highly effective and less vulnerable than helicopters.
Furthermore, these Broncos reputedly performed strikes with the experimental AGR-20A “Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS)”, a Hydra 70-millimeter rocket with a laser-seeking head as guidance - developed for precision strikes against small urban targets with little collateral damage. The experiment ended satisfactorily, but the machines were retired again, and the small unit was dissolved.
However, the machines had shown their worth in asymmetric warfare, and the U.S. Air Force decided to invest in reactivating the OV-10 on a regular basis, despite the overhead cost of operating an additional aircraft type in relatively small numbers – but development and production of a similar new type would have caused much higher costs, with an uncertain time until an operational aircraft would be ready for service. Re-activating a proven design and updating an existing airframe appeared more efficient.
The result became the MV-10H, suitably christened “Super Bronco” but also known as “Black Pony”, after the program's internal name. This aircraft was derived from the official OV-10X proposal by Boeing from 2009 for the USAF's Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance requirement. Initially, Boeing proposed to re-start OV-10 manufacture, but this was deemed uneconomical, due to the expected small production number of new serial aircraft, so the “Black Pony” program became a modernization project. In consequence, all airframes for the "new" MV-10Hs were recovered OV-10s of various types from the "boneyard" at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.
While the revamped aircraft would maintain much of its 1960s-vintage rugged external design, modernizations included a completely new, armored central fuselage with a highly modified cockpit section, ejection seats and a computerized glass cockpit. The “Black Pony” OV-10 had full dual controls, so that either crewmen could steer the aircraft while the other operated sensors and/or weapons. This feature would also improve survivability in case of incapacitation of a crew member as the result from a hit.
The cockpit armor protected the crew and many vital systems from 23mm shells and shrapnel (e. g. from MANPADS). The crew still sat in tandem under a common, generously glazed canopy with flat, bulletproof panels for reduced sun reflections, with the pilot in the front seat and an observer/WSO behind. The Bronco’s original cargo capacity and the rear door were retained, even though the extra armor and defensive measures like chaff/flare dispensers as well as an additional fuel cell in the central fuselage limited the capacity. However, it was still possible to carry and deploy personnel, e. g. small special ops teams of up to four when the aircraft flew in clean configuration.
Additional updates for the MV-10H included structural reinforcements for a higher AUW and higher g load maneuvers, similar to OV-10D+ standards. The landing gear was also reinforced, and the aircraft kept its ability to operate from short, improvised airstrips. A fixed refueling probe was added to improve range and loiter time.
Intelligence sensors and smart weapon capabilities included a FLIR sensor and a laser range finder/target designator, both mounted in a small turret on the aircraft’s nose. The MV-10H was also outfitted with a data link and the ability to carry an integrated targeting pod such as the Northrop Grumman LITENING or the Lockheed Martin Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP). Also included was the Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver (ROVER) to provide live sensor data and video recordings to personnel on the ground.
To improve overall performance and to better cope with the higher empty weight of the modified aircraft as well as with operations under hot-and-high conditions, the engines were beefed up. The new General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines improved the Bronco's performance considerably: top speed increased by 100 mph (160 km/h), the climb rate was tripled (a weak point of early OV-10s despite the type’s good STOL capability) and both take-off as well as landing run were almost halved. The new engines called for longer nacelles, and their circular diameter markedly differed from the former Garrett T76-G-420/421 turboprop engines. To better exploit the additional power and reduce the aircraft’s audio signature, reversible contraprops, each with eight fiberglass blades, were fitted. These allowed a reduced number of revolutions per minute, resulting in less noise from the blades and their tips, while the engine responsiveness was greatly improved. The CT7-9Ds’ exhausts were fitted with muzzlers/air mixers to further reduce the aircraft's noise and heat signature.
Another novel and striking feature was the addition of so-called “tip sails” to the wings: each wingtip was elongated with a small, cigar-shaped fairing, each carrying three staggered, small “feather blade” winglets. Reputedly, this installation contributed ~10% to the higher climb rate and improved lift/drag ratio by ~6%, improving range and loiter time, too.
Drawing from the Iraq experience as well as from the USMC’s NOGS test program with a converted OV-10D as a night/all-weather gunship/reconnaissance platform, the MV-10H received a heavier gun armament: the original four light machine guns that were only good for strafing unarmored targets were deleted and their space in the sponsons replaced by avionics. Instead, the aircraft was outfitted with a lightweight M197 three-barrel 20mm gatling gun in a chin turret. This could be fixed in a forward position at high speed or when carrying forward-firing ordnance under the stub wings, or it could be deployed to cover a wide field of fire under the aircraft when it was flying slower, being either slaved to the FLIR or to a helmet sighting auto targeting system.
The original seven hardpoints were retained (1x ventral, 2x under each sponson, and another pair under the outer wings), but the total ordnance load was slightly increased and an additional pair of launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinders or other light AAMs under the wing tips were added – not only as a defensive measure, but also with an anti-helicopter role in mind; four more Sidewinders could be carried on twin launchers under the outer wings against aerial targets. Other guided weapons cleared for the MV-10H were the light laser-guided AGR-20A and AGM-119 Hellfire missiles, the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System upgrade to the light Hydra 70 rockets, the new Laser Guided Zuni Rocket which had been cleared for service in 2010, TV-/IR-/laser-guided AGM-65 Maverick AGMs and AGM-122 Sidearm anti-radar missiles, plus a wide range of gun and missile pods, iron and cluster bombs, as well as ECM and flare/chaff pods, which were not only carried defensively, but also in order to disrupt enemy ground communication.
In this configuration, a contract for the conversion of twelve mothballed American Broncos to the new MV-10H standard was signed with Boeing in 2016, and the first MV-10H was handed over to the USAF in early 2018, with further deliveries lasting into early 2020. All machines were allocated to the newly founded 919th Special Operations Support Squadron at Duke Field (Florida). This unit was part of the 919th Special Operations Wing, an Air Reserve Component (ARC) of the United States Air Force. It was assigned to the Tenth Air Force of Air Force Reserve Command and an associate unit of the 1st Special Operations Wing, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). If mobilized the wing was gained by AFSOC (Air Force Special Operations Command) to support Special Tactics, the U.S. Air Force's special operations ground force. Similar in ability and employment to Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC), U.S. Army Special Forces and U.S. Navy SEALs, Air Force Special Tactics personnel were typically the first to enter combat and often found themselves deep behind enemy lines in demanding, austere conditions, usually with little or no support.
The MV-10Hs are expected to provide support for these ground units in the form of all-weather reconnaissance and observation, close air support and also forward air control duties for supporting ground units. Precision ground strikes and protection from enemy helicopters and low-flying aircraft were other, secondary missions for the modernized Broncos, which are expected to serve well into the 2040s. Exports or conversions of foreign OV-10s to the Black Pony standard are not planned, though.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 42 ft 2½ in (12,88 m) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 45 ft 10½ in(14 m) incl. tip sails
Height: 15 ft 2 in (4.62 m)
Wing area: 290.95 sq ft (27.03 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 64A315
Empty weight: 9,090 lb (4,127 kg)
Gross weight: 13,068 lb (5,931 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 17,318 lb (7,862 kg)
Powerplant:
2× General Electric CT7-9D turboprop engines, 1,305 kW (1,750 hp) each,
driving 8-bladed Hamilton Standard 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m) diameter constant-speed,
fully feathering, reversible contra-rotating propellers with metal hub and composite blades
Performance:
Maximum speed: 390 mph (340 kn, 625 km/h)
Combat range: 198 nmi (228 mi, 367 km)
Ferry range: 1,200 nmi (1,400 mi, 2,200 km) with auxiliary fuel
Maximum loiter time: 5.5 h with auxiliary fuel
Service ceiling: 32.750 ft (10,000 m)
13,500 ft (4.210 m) on one engine
Rate of climb: 17.400 ft/min (48 m/s) at sea level
Take-off run: 480 ft (150 m)
740 ft (227 m) to 50 ft (15 m)
1,870 ft (570 m) to 50 ft (15 m) at MTOW
Landing run: 490 ft (150 m)
785 ft (240 m) at MTOW
1,015 ft (310 m) from 50 ft (15 m)
Armament:
1x M197 3-barreled 20 mm Gatling cannon in a chin turret with 750 rounds ammo capacity
7x hardpoints for a total load of 5.000 lb (2,270 kg)
2x wingtip launch rails for AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional Bronco update/conversion was simply spawned by the idea: could it be possible to replace the original cockpit section with one from an AH-1 Cobra, for a kind of gunship version?
The basis is the Academy OV-10D kit, mated with the cockpit section from a Fujimi AH-1S TOW Cobra (Revell re-boxing, though), chosen because of its “boxy” cockpit section with flat glass panels – I think that it conveys the idea of an armored cockpit section best. Combining these parts was not easy, though, even though the plan sound simple. Initially, the Bronco’s twin booms, wings and stabilizer were built separately, because this made PSR on these sections easier than trying the same on a completed airframe. One of the initial challenges: the different engines. I wanted something uprated, and a different look, and I had a pair of (excellent!) 1:144 resin engines from the Russian company Kompakt Zip for a Tu-95 bomber at hand, which come together with movable(!) eight-blade contraprops that were an almost perfect size match for the original three-blade props. Biggest problem: the Tu-95 nacelles have a perfectly circular diameter, while the OV-10’s booms are square and rectangular. Combining these parts and shapes was already a messy PST affair, but it worked out quite well – even though the result rather reminds of some Chinese upgrade measure (anyone know the Tu-4 copies with turboprops? This here looks similar!). But while not pretty, I think that the beafier look works well and adds to the idea of a “revived” aircraft. And you can hardly beat the menacing look of contraprops on anything...
The exotic, so-called “tip sails” on the wings, mounted on short booms, are a detail borrowed from the Shijiazhuang Y-5B-100, an updated Chinese variant/copy of the Antonov An-2 biplane transporter. The booms are simple pieces of sprue from the Bronco kit, the winglets were cut from 0.5mm styrene sheet.
For the cockpit donor, the AH-1’s front section was roughly built, including the engine section (which is a separate module, so that the basic kit can be sold with different engine sections), and then the helicopter hull was cut and trimmed down to match the original Bronco pod and to fit under the wing. This became more complicated than expected, because a) the AH-1 cockpit and the nose are considerably shorter than the OV-10s, b) the AH-1 fuselage is markedly taller than the Bronco’s and c) the engine section, which would end up in the area of the wing, features major recesses, making the surface very uneven – calling for massive PSR to even this out. PSR was also necessary to hide the openings for the Fujimi AH-1’s stub wings. Other issues: the front landing gear (and its well) had to be added, as well as the OV-10 wing stubs. Furthermore, the new cockpit pod’s rear section needed an aerodynamical end/fairing, but I found a leftover Academy OV-10 section from a build/kitbashing many moons ago. Perfect match!
All these challenges could be tackled, even though the AH-1 cockpit looks surprisingly stout and massive on the Bronco’s airframe - the result looks stockier than expected, but it works well for the "Gunship" theme. Lots of PSR went into the new central fuselage section, though, even before it was mated with the OV-10 wing and the rest of the model.
Once cockpit and wing were finally mated, the seams had to disappear under even more PSR and a spinal extension of the canopy had to be sculpted across the upper wing surface, which would meld with the pod’s tail in a (more or less) harmonious shape. Not an easy task, and the fairing was eventually sculpted with 2C putty, plus even more PSR… Looks quite homogenous, though.
After this massive body work, other hardware challenges appeared like small distractions. The landing gear was another major issue because the deeper AH-1 section lowered the ground clearance, also because of the chin turret. To counter this, I raised the OV-10’s main landing gear by ~2mm – not much, but it was enough to create a credible stance, together with the front landing gear transplant under the cockpit, which received an internal console to match the main landing gear’s length. Due to the chin turret and the shorter nose, the front wheel retracts backwards now. But this looks quite plausible, thanks to the additional space under the cockpit tub, which also made a belt feed for the gun’s ammunition supply believable.
To enhance the menacing look I gave the model a fixed refueling boom, made from 1mm steel wire and a receptor adapter sculpted with white glue. The latter stuff was also used add some antenna fairings around the hull. Some antennae, chaff dispensers and an IR decoy were taken from the Academy kit.
The ordnance came from various sources. The Sidewinders under the wing tips were taken from an Italeri F-16C/D kit, they look better than the missiles from the Academy Bronco kit. Their launch rails came from an Italeri Bae Hawk 200. The quadruple Hellfire launchers on the underwing hardpoints were left over from an Italeri AH-1W, and they are a perfect load for this aircraft and its role. The LAU-10 and -19 missile pods on the stub wings were taken from the OV-10 kit.
Painting and markings:
Finding a suitable and somewhat interesting – but still plausible – paint scheme was not easy. Taking the A-10 as benchmark, an overall light grey livery (with focus on low contrast against the sky as protection against ground fire) would have been a likely choice – and in fact the last operational American OV-10s were painted in this fashion. But in order to provide a different look I used the contemporary USAF V-22Bs and Special Operations MC-130s as benchmark, which typically carry a darker paint scheme consisting of FS 36118 (suitably “Gunship Gray” :D) from above, FS 36375 underneath, with a low, wavy waterline, plus low-viz markings. Not spectacular, but plausible – and very similar to the late r/w Colombian OV-10s.
The cockpit tub became Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231, Humbrol 140) and the landing gear white (Revell 301).
The model received an overall black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, to liven up the dull all-grey livery. The decals were gathered from various sources, and I settled for black USAF low-viz markings. The “stars and bars” come from a late USAF F-4, the “IP” tail code was tailored from F-16 markings and the shark mouth was taken from an Academy AH-64. Most stencils came from another Academy OV-10 sheet and some other sources.
Decals were also used to create the trim on the propeller blades and markings on the ordnance.
Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and some exhaust soot stains were added with graphite along the tail boom flanks.
A successful transplantation – but is this still a modified Bronco or already a kitbashing? The result looks quite plausible and menacing, even though the TOW Cobra front section appears relatively massive. But thanks to the bigger engines and extended wing tips the proportions still work. The large low-pressure tires look a bit goofy under the aircraft, but they are original. The grey livery works IMHO well, too – a more colorful or garish scheme would certainly have distracted from the modified technical basis.
Again I used the brown putty for dirt in the planter. I cut tubular styrene and painted it for the planters.
+++ 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 Cessna Model 336 and 337 “Skymaster” were American twin-engine civil utility aircraft built in a unique push-pull configuration. Their engines were mounted in the nose and rear of its pod-style fuselage. Twin booms extended aft of the wings to the vertical stabilizers, with the rear engine between them. The horizontal stabilizer was aft of the pusher propeller, mounted between and connecting the two booms.
The first Skymaster, Model 336, had fixed landing gear and initially flew on February 28, 1961. It went into production in May 1963 with 195 being produced through mid-1964. In February 1965, Cessna introduced the larger Model 337 Super Skymaster with more powerful engines, retractable landing gear, and a dorsal air scoop for the rear engine (the "Super" prefix was subsequently dropped from the name). In 1966, the turbocharged T337 was introduced, and in 1973, the pressurized P337G entered production.
The type was very prolific and Cessna built 2.993 Skymasters of all variants, including 513 military O-2 (nicknamed "Oscar Deuce") versions from 1967 onwards. The latter featured underwing ordnance hard points to hold unguided rockets, gun pods or flares, and served in the forward air control (FAC) role and psychological operations (PSYOPS) by the US military between 1967 and 2010. Production in America ended in 1982, but was continued by Reims in France, with the FTB337 STOL and the military FTMA “Milirole”.
Both civil and military Cessna 336/337 version had long service careers, and some were considerably modified for new operators and uses. Among the most drastic conversions was the Spectrum SA-550, built by Spectrum Aircraft Corporation of Van Nuys, California, in the mid-1980s: Spectrum took the 336/337 airframe and removed the front engine, lengthened the nose to maintain the center of gravity, and replaced the rear piston engine with a pusher turboprop which offered more power than the combined pair of original petrol engines. The Spectrum SA-550 conversion also came together with an optional modernization package that prolonged the airframes’ service life, so that modified machines could well serve on for 20 years or more.
This drastic conversion was executed for both military and civil operators. The best-known military SA-550s were six former USAF O-2A airframes, which had been transferred to the U.S. Navy in 1983 for use as range controllers with VA-122 at NAS Lemoore, California. These aircraft were operationally nicknamed “Pelican”, due to the characteristic new nose shape, and the name unofficially caught on.
However, the SA-550 package was only adopted sporadically by private operators, but it became quite popular among several major police and fire departments. Typical duties for these machines included border/drug patrol, surveillance/observation duties (e.g. traffic, forest fire) and special tasks, including drug interdiction as well for SAR missions and undercover operations like narcotics and serialized criminal investigations. Some SA-550s were accordingly modified and individually outfitted with suitable sensors, including IR/low light cameras, searchlights, and internal auxiliary tanks. None were armed, even though some aircraft featured underwing hardpoints for external extra tanks, flare dispensers for nocturnal operations or smoke charge dispensers for ground target marking to guide water bombers to hidden forest fires.
The type’s versatility, low noise level, high travel speed and good loitering time in the operational area at low speed proved to be vital assets for these public service operators and justified its relatively high maintenance costs. A handful of the modernized Spectrum SA-550 machines were still in active service after the Millennium, primarily in the USA.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1 + 3 passengers (up to 5 passengers possible in special seat configuration)
Length: 32 ft 6½ in (9.94 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft ¾ in (11.62 m)
Height: 9 ft 2 in (2.79 m)
Wing area: 201 sq ft (18.81 m²)
Aspect ratio: 7.18:1
Airfoil: NACA 2412 at root, NACA 2409 at tip
Empty weight: 2,655 lb (1,204 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 4,400 lb (1,996 kg)
Fuel capacity: 92 US gal (77 imp gal; 350 l) normal,
128 US gal (107 imp gal; 480 l) with auxiliary tank
in the cabin instead of two passenger seats
Powerplant:
1× Pratt & Whitney PT6A-27 turboprop engine, delivering 550 shp (410 kW) and
driving a four-blade McCauley fully-feathering, constant-speed propeller, 6 ft 4 in (1.93 m) diameter
Performance:
Maximum speed: 199 mph (320 km/h, 173 kn) at sea level
Cruise speed: 144 mph (232 km/h, 125 kn) at 10,000 ft (3,000 m) (econ cruise)
Stall speed: 69 mph (111 km/h, 60 kn)
Range: 1421 mi (2.288 km, 1.243 nmi) at 10.000 ft (3.050 m) altitude and economy cruise
Service ceiling: 19,500 ft (5,900 m)
Rate of climb: 1,200 ft/min (6.1 m/s)
Takeoff distance to 50 ft (15m): 1,545 ft (471 m)
Landing distance from 50 ft (15m): 1,650 ft (500 m)
The kit and its assembly:
This build is the combination of ingredients that had already been stashed away for a long time, and the “Red Lights” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com in early 2021 was a good motivator and occasion to finally put everything together.
The basis is an ARII 1:72 Cessna T337 model kit – I had purchased it long ago with the expectation to create a military Skymaster from it, but I was confused by a fixed landing gear which would make it a 336? Well, without a further concrete plan the kit preliminarily landed in The Stash™…
However, the ARII model features the optional observation windows in the doors on the starboard side, in the form of a complete(!) fuselage half, so that it lends itself to a police or firefighter aircraft of some sort. This idea was furthermore fueled by a decal sheet that I had been given from a friend, left over from a 1:72 Italeri JetRanger, with three optional police helicopter markings.
The final creative element was the real-world “Pelican” conversion of six O-2As for the US Navy, as mentioned in the background above: the front engine was replaced with a longer nose and the engine configuration changed to a pusher-only aircraft with a single powerful turboprop engine. This looked so odd that I wanted to modify the ARII Cessna in a similar fashion, too, and all these factors came together in this model.
My Arii Cessna 337 kit is a re-boxing from 2009, but its origins date back to Eidai in 1972 and that’s just what you get: a vintage thing with some flash and sinkholes, raised (but fine) surface details and pretty crude seams with bulges and gaps. Some PSR is direly necessary, esp. the fit of the fuselage halves is cringeworthy. The clear parts were no source of joy, either; especially the windscreen turned out to be thick, very streaky (to a degree that I’d almost call it opaque!) and even not fully molded! The side glazing was also not very clear. I tried to improve the situation through polishing, but if the basis is already poor, there’s little you can do about it. Hrmpf.
However, the kit was built mostly OOB, including the extra O-2 glazing in the lower doors, but with some mods. One is a (barely visible) extra tank in the cabin’s rear, plus a pilot and an observer figure placed into the tight front seats. The extended “Pelican” nose was a lucky find – I was afraid that I had had to sculpt a nose from scratch with 2C putty. But I found a radome from a Hasegawa RA-5C, left over from a model I built in the Eighties and that has since long fallen apart. However, this nose fitted almost perfectly in size and shape, I just “blunted” the tip a little. Additionally, both the hull in front of the dashboard and the Vigilante radome were filled with as many lead beads as possible to keep the nose down.
The kit’s OOB spatted, fixed landing gear was retained – even though it is dubious for a Cessna 337, because this type had a fully retractable landing gear, and the model has the landing gear covers actually molded into the lower fuselage. On the other side, the Cessna 336’s fixed landing gear looks quite different, too! However, this is a what-if model, and a fixed landing gear might have been a measure to reduce maintenance costs?
The propeller was replaced with a resin four-blade aftermarket piece (from CMK, probably the best-fitting thing on this build!) on my standard metal axis/styrene tube adapter arrangement. The propeller belongs to a Shorts Tucano, but I think that it works well on the converted Cessna and its powerful pusher engine, even though in the real world, the SA-550 is AFAIK driven by a three-blade prop. For the different engine I also enlarged the dorsal air intake with a 1.5 mm piece of styrene sheet added on top of the molded original air scoop and added a pair of ventral exhaust stubs (scratched from sprue material).
Another addition is a pair of winglets, made from 0.5 mm styrene sheet – an upgrade which I found on several late Cessna 337s in various versions. They just add to the modernized look of the aircraft. For the intended observation role, a hemispherical fairing under the nose hides a 180° camera, and I added some antennae around the hull.
However, a final word concerning the model kit itself: nothing fits, be warned! While the kit is a simple affair and looks quite good in the box, assembling it turned out to be a nightmare, with flash, sinkholes, a brittle styrene and gaps everywhere. This includes the clear parts, which are pretty thick and blurry. The worst thing is the windscreen, which is not only EXTRA thick and EXTRA blurry, it was also not completely molded, with gaps on both sides. I tried to get it clearer through manual polishing, but the streaky blurs are integral – no hope for improvement unless you completely replace the parts! If I ever build a Cessna 337/O-2 again, I will give the Airfix kit a try, it can only be better…
Painting and markings:
The choice between the operator options from the JetRanger sheet was hard, it included Sweden and Italy, but I eventually settled for the LAPD because the livery looks cool and this police department not only operates helicopters, but also some fixed-wing aircraft.
I adapted the LAPD’s classic black-and-white police helicopter livery (Gloss White and Black, Humbrol 22 and 21, respectively) to the Cessna and extended it to the wings. At this point – already upset because of the poor fit of the hardware – disaster struck in the form of Humbrol’s 22 turning into a pinkish ivory upon curing! In the tin, the paint and its pigments looked pretty white and “clean”, and I assume that it’s the thinner that caused this change. What a crap! It’s probably the third tin with 22 that causes trouble, even though in different peculiarities!
The result was total rubbish, though, and I tried to rub the paint off as good as possible on the small model with its many windows, the fixed, delicate landing gear and the wing support struts. Then I overpainted the areas with Revell 301 (Semi-matt White). While this enamel yielded the intended pure white tone, the paint itself is rather gooey and not easy to work with, so that the overall finish turned out worse than desired. At least the black paint worked properly. The demarcations were created with black decal stripes (TL Modellbau), because the tiny model left little room for complex masking measures – and I did not risk any more painting accidents.
Since the aircraft would be kept shiny and clean, I just did a light black ink washing to emphasize surface details and did a light panel post-shading on the black areas, not for weathering but rather to accent surface structures. No further weathering was done (and necessary).
The markings/decals come – as mentioned above – from an Italeri 1:72 JetRanger, but they were augmented with some additional markings, e. g. grey walkways on the wings and “L-A-P-D” in large black letters under the wings, to distract from the poor finish of the white paint around them…
Finally, the kit was sealed overall with Italeri semi-gloss acrylic varnish, just with a matt anti-glare shield in front of the windscreen, which received thin white trim lines (generic decal stripes).
A challenging build due to the Arii kit’s rather poor basis, the massive rhinoplasty and the crisp paint scheme. However, I like the result – what-if models do not always have to be armed military vehicles, there’s potential in other genres, too. And this mono-engine “Pelican” Skymaster plays its role as a “flying eye” in police service credibly and well. However, this was my first and last Eidai kit…
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In September 1952, the United States Navy announced a requirement for a new fighter. It was to have a top speed of Mach 1.2 at 30,000 ft (9,144.0 m) with a climb rate of 25,000 ft/min (127.0 m/s), and a landing speed of no more than 100 mph (160 km/h). Korean War experience had demonstrated that 0.50 inch (12.7 mm) machine guns were no longer sufficient, and as the result the new fighter was to carry a 20 mm (0.79 in) cannon. In response, the Vought team led by John Russell Clark, created the V-383. Unusual for a fighter, the aircraft had a high-mounted wing which necessitated the use of a fuselage-mounted short and light landing gear.
The Crusader was powered by a Pratt and Whitney J57 turbojet engine. The engine was equipped with an afterburner that, unlike on later engines, was either fully lit, or off (i.e. it did not have "zones"). The engine produced 18,000 lb of thrust at full power, enough to allow the F-8 to climb straight up in clean configuration. The most innovative aspect of the design was the variable-incidence wing which pivoted by 5° out of the fuselage on takeoff and landing (not to be confused with variable-sweep wing). This allowed a greater angle of attack, increasing lift without compromising forward visibility. This innovation helped the F-8's development team win the Collier Trophy in 1956. Simultaneously, the lift was augmented by leading-edge slats drooping by 25° and inboard flaps extending to 30°. The rest of the aircraft took advantage of contemporary aerodynamic innovations with area-ruled fuselage, all-moving stabilators, dog-tooth notching at the wing folds for improved yaw stability, and liberal use of titanium in the airframe.
The armament, as specified by the Navy, consisted primarily of four 20 mm (.79 in) autocannons, and the Crusader happened to be the last U.S. fighter designed with guns as its primary weapon. They were supplemented with a retractable tray with 32 unguided Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rocket (Mighty Mouse FFARs), and cheek pylons for a pair of IR-guided AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. In practice, AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles were the F-8's primary weapon, because the 20mm guns were "generally unreliable."
In May 1953, the Vought design was declared a winner and in June, Vought received an order for three XF8U-1 prototypes (after adoption of the unified designation system in September 1962, the F8U became the F-8). The first prototype flew on 25 March 1955 with John Konrad at the controls, exceeding the speed of sound during its maiden flight. On 4 April 1956, the F8U-1 performed its first catapult launch from Forrestal.
In US service, the F-8 served principally in the Vietnam War and several versions, including all-weather fighters with improved radar and photo-recce versions, were developed. An update program between 1965 and 1970 prolonged the fighters’ time of active duty into the late Seventies. The RF-8 reconnaissance aircraft served longer and were retired in 1987.
Despite its qualities, only a few foreign countries operated the F-8. Beyond France and the Philippines, Argentina bought twelve revamped Crusaders plus two additional airframes for spares from US surplus stock for its carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo (V-2) in 1975. The ship previously served in the Royal Navy as HMS Venerable and the Royal Netherlands Navy as HNLMS Karel Doorman and had been put into Argentine service in 1969. It could carry up to 24 aircraft and initially operated with obsolete F4U Corsairs and F9F Panthers and Cougars. These were soon replaced by A-4Q Skyhawks (modified A-4Bs, also from US stock), but these machines were rather fighter bombers than interceptors that could not effectively guard the ship or its surrounding fleet from air strikes. This led to the procurement of Argentina’s small F-8 fleet, a process that started in 1973, just after the Skyhawks had entered service.
The Argentinian Crusaders (locally known as “Cruzados”) were based on the F-8E all-weather fighter variant. This type was the ultimate evolution of the original F-8 series, before the modernization program that turned these machines into F-8Js in US service. The F-8E was, beyond its four 20mm cannon, able to carry up to four AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs on Y-shaped fuselage pylons. The original unguided missile pannier had been replaced by an extra fuel tank, and two dry underwing pylons allowed the carriage of unguided bombs or missiles. The USN’s F-8Es also had extra avionics in a shallow dorsal hump for the deployment of the radio-guided AGM-12 Bullpup air-to-ground missile, so that the aircraft could also carry out strike duties against small target – in theory, since the AGM-12 had to be visually guided by the pilot all the way while flying at lower levels in the combat environment.
However, the Argentine Navy requested some peculiar modifications for its aircraft, which were quite similar to the French Navy’s F-8E (FN), the last Crusaders that had left the production lines in 1965. This special Crusader variant became the F-8Q. It retained the F-8E’s J57-P-20A engine as well as the AN/APQ-94 fire-control radar and the IRST sensor blister in front of the canopy. A Martin-Baker ejection seat was fitted and the cockpit instruments were updated to Argentinian standards.
In order to ease operation and especially landing on the relatively small Veinticinco de Mayo, the F-8Q was, like the French Crusaders, modified with the maximum angle of incidence of the aircraft's wing increased from five to seven degrees, and blown flaps were fitted, too. This reduced the rate of descent to 11’ (3.35 m) per second and limited the force of gravity during landings to 3.5 G. The approach speed was also considerably reduced, by roundabout 15 knots (17.5 mph or 28 km/h).
Since Argentina did not operate the AGM-12 Bullpup and wanted a dedicated interceptor, the missile avionics were deleted and the hump disappeared, in an effort to save weight. Furthermore, the wing pylons received plumbing so that drop tanks could be carried, beyond the standard unguided ordnance of bombs or unguided missile pods. The F-8Q’s total payload was 5,000 lb (2,270 kg), but when operating from Veinticinco de Mayo, any external ordnance beyond the four Sidewinders was ever carried because the F-8’s TOW was at the ship’s catapult limits. When operating from land bases, the F-8Qs would frequently carry drop tanks in order to extend their range.
Upon delivery in late 1975, the F-8Q’s sported the standard US Navy scheme of Light Gull Grey upper surfaces over white undersides, just like the Skyhawks and other operational aircraft types of the Argentinian Navy. Typically, six F-8Qs were always based on board of Veinticinco de Mayo and rotated with the rest of the machines, which were, together with A-4Qs, based at BAN Rio Grande.
The F-8Qs formed the 1st Flight of the 3 Escuadrilla Aeronaval de Caza y Ataque that operated from Veinticinco de Mayo, and the machines received tactical codes between “101” and “112”. However, this gave in 1980 way to a more toned-down paint scheme in dark blue-grey over white, at a phase when Argentina tried to acquire Dassault Super Étendards and Exocet missiles from France. The new paint scheme was gradually introduced, though, the first to be re-painted were “107”, “108” and “110” in summer 1981.
Despite their availability, the F-8Qs did not actively take part in the Falklands War of 1982. This was primarily because ARA Veinticinco de Mayo was initially used in support of the Argentine landings on the Falklands: on the day of the invasion, she waited with 1.500 army soldiers outside Stanley harbor as first submarine and boat-landed commandos secured landing areas, and then Argentine marines made the main amphibious landing. Her aircraft were not used during the invasion and remained at land bases.
Later, in defense of the occupation, the carrier was deployed in a task force north of the Falkland Islands, with ARA General Belgrano to the south, and this time the usual six F-8Qs were on board and provided air cover. Out of fear from losing the carrier, though (the British had assigned HMS Splendid (S106), a nuclear-powered submarine, to track down Veinticinco de Mayo and sink her if necessary), the ship and its aircraft remained mostly outside of the direct confrontation theatre and rather acted as a distraction, binding British resources and attention.
However, after hostilities broke out on 1 May 1982, the Argentine carrier attempted to launch a wave of A-4Q Skyhawk jets against the Royal Navy Task Force after her S-2 Trackers detected the British fleet. What would have been the first battle between aircraft carriers since World War II did not take place, though, as winds prevented the heavily loaded jets from being launched. After the British nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror sank General Belgrano, Veinticinco de Mayo returned to port for her own safety. The naval A-4Q Skyhawks flew the rest of the war from the airbase in Río Grande, Tierra del Fuego, and had some success against the Royal Navy, sinking HMS Ardent, even though three Skyhawks were shot down by Sea Harriers. The Crusaders were held back for homeland defense from Río Gallegos air base, since Argentina’s limited air refueling capacities (just a pair of C-130s, and all buddy refueling packs for the Skyhawks were out of order) had to be saved and concentrated on the Skyhawks.
After her involvement in the Falklands/Malvinas conflict, Veinticinco de Mayo resumed regular service and was in 1983 modified to carry the new Dassault Super Étendard jets (which had turned out to be too heavy for the original catapult, which also barely got the F-8Qs into the air), but soon after problems in her engines largely confined her to port. She was deemed more or less unseaworthy and this confined the Argentinian Navy’s jet force to land bases.
From this point on, the F-8Qs lost their raison d’être, since the Argentinian air force already had, with the Mirage III and IAI Nesher/Dagger, capable and less costly land-based interceptors available. Due to lack of spares and funds, the remaining Argentinian Crusaders (after several accidents, only eight F-8Qs were still in service and only five of them actually operational) were in 1988 transferred to Villa Reynolds air base in Western Central Argentina, grounded and stored in the open, where they quickly deteriorated. Eventually, all F-8Qs were scrapped in the early Nineties. Only one specimen survived and has been preserved in its original Gull Grey/White livery as a gate guard at the Naval Aviation Command headquarters at Comandante Espora Airport, Bahía Blanca.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 54 ft 3 in (16.54 m)
Wingspan: 35 ft 8 in (10.87 m)
Height: 15 ft 9 in (4.80 m)
Wing area: 375 sq ft (34.8 m²)
Aspect ratio: 3.4
Airfoil: root: NACA 65A006 mod;
tip: NACA 65A005 mod
Zero-lift drag coefficient: CD0.0133
Drag area: 5.0 sq ft (0.46 m²)
Empty weight: 17,541 lb (7,956 kg)
Gross weight: 29,000 lb (13,154 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 34,000 lb (15,422 kg)
Fuel capacity: 1,325 US gal (1,103.3 imp gal; 5,015.7 L)
Powerplant:
1× Pratt & Whitney J57-P-20A afterburning turbojet engine
with 10,700 lbf (48 kN) dry thrust and 18,000 lbf (80 kN) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,066 kn (1,227 mph, 1,974 km/h) at 36,000 ft (10,973 m)
Maximum speed: Mach 1.86
Cruise speed: 495 kn (570 mph, 917 km/h)
Combat range: 394 nmi (453 mi, 730 km)
Ferry range: 1,507 nmi (1,734 mi, 2,791 km) with external fuel
Service ceiling: 58,000 ft (18,000 m)
Rate of climb: 19,000 ft/min (97 m/s)
Lift-to-drag: 12.8
Wing loading: 77.3 lb/sq ft (377 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.62
Armament:
4× 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk 12 cannons in lower fuselage, 125 RPG
2× side fuselage mounted Y-pylons for up to four AIM-9 Sidewinders and/or Zuni rockets
2× underwing pylon stations with a capacity of 4,000 lb (2,000 kg)
The kit and its assembly:
This relatively simple build was triggered by the “In the navy” group build at whatifmodelers.com in April/May 2020, even though I started it too late for the deadline.
After having recently read a lot of stuff about the Falklands/Malvinas conflict, I wondered if Argentina could not have procured a dedicated fighter for its single carrier – and the F-8 from US surplus stocks was a perfect candidate for the potential timeframe of the Seventies, when the type was retired from USN/USMC service or, in part, modernized and/or put up for sale, like the machines for the Philippines. The only real-world problem would have been the weight: the F-8E weighed up to 15 tons, while the Super Étendard, which was reportedly already hard to launch from Veinticinco de Mayo, had a MTOW of “only” 12 tons. Not certain if the F-8’s afterburner engine and the wings’ raised angle of incidence would have been enough to launch a Crusader? Well, it’s whifworld, after all. 😉
The basis is the Hasegawa F-8E, a kit that I had originally stashed away as a donor for a different project.
The model was built mostly OOB, I just sanded the dorsal avionics hump away and gave the machine a pair of drop tanks under the wings (from an A-4) – a rather unusual sight on a Crusader, and it looks even more weird with the wings in the raised position! The Sidewinders, relatively simple pieces, too, were taken OOB, since they look very much like early AIM-9Bs.
The kit goes together well, but it is a simple affair and you see the mold’s age. You get raised (though fine) panel lines, a rather simple cockpit tub with flat dashboards (for decals), a clumsy seat and no cockpit back wall at all. Fit is basically O.K., but the windscreen refused to fit well, and the hatch turned out to be somewhat too narrow for the rear bulkhead you are supposed to glue into it. Furthermore, the fuselage halves, especially on the underside, have shallow shrink areas close to the seams, so that PSR is mandatory. I would, not call the kit my first choice for the F-8 (which would rather be the Academy kit), but you get the Hasegawa kit at reasonable prices, and I originally purchased it as a body donor bank.
Since the kit lacks a proper air intake duct, sanding the fuselage halves inside of the respective orifice is not easy - I used a soft acrylic putty and left the radome away until the job was done. Furthermore, I added a visual blocker inside of the intake, a piece of black foamed styrene under the cockpit tub - otherwise you have direct sight down the empty interior in a head-on view.
Further small additions are some blade antennae on the hull and on the fin, inspired by the Argentinian Skyhawks.
Painting and markings:
Again, I wanted a rather subtle, semi-authentic look. The most natural choice would certainly have been a Light Gull Grey/White livery like the A-4Qs, but for a twist and because I like the late French F-8Ps in their all-over dark grey livery, I settled upon something that resembles the French/Argentinian Super Étendards: a dark, bluish-grey upper surface with white undersides and the upper colors well wrapped around the wings’ leading edges.
Concerning the French grey tone there are many different opinions and recommendations – ranging from Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231, which is IMHO much too light) over Gunship Grey (FS 36118) to dark blue.
I settled for Humbrol 79 (Blue Grey) as basic tone, which is AFAIK Humbrol’s interpretation of the German RAL 7012 (Basaltgrau), a tone that is very close to the British Dark Sea Grey. The undersides, including the landing gear, were painted with acrylic semi-gloss white from a rattle can. This was done as the first step, with a masked low waterline. Then the grey was applied by brush, and also wrapped around the wings’ leading edges. In order to improve the camouflage effect from above, the pylons as well as the outer sides of the stabilizers under the tail were painted in blue grey, too.
The flags on the rudder as well as the on the stabilizers were painted with white and Humbrol 48 (Mediterranean Blue), too, just the sun emblems on the fin are decals. Since the F-8 has, unlike the A-4 or the Sue, all-mowing stabilizers, I decided to paint the whole tail surface in white and blue and not just the trailing edge. This looks quite bright, but it is IMHO a great detail that sets this whif really apart and shows some pride.
The afterburner fairing was painted with a mix of Humbrol 27002 and 27003 (Polished Aluminum and Steel Metallizer) and later treated with graphite for a burnt look.
After an overall black ink wash the upper surfaces were treated with dry-brushed post shading (Humbrol 106 and 156). The decals come primarily from an Academy Super Étendard, augmented by markings from various decals from an Airfix Falklands War kit set sheet (e.g. the sun icons for the fin flash).
The silver leading edges of the wings, stabilizers and the fin were created with decal sheet material. the same material in black was used for walkway markings.
Decals come primarily from an Acedemy Super Étendard sheet, the tactical code was modified. Only the sun icons on the fin flash had to be procured from a different source (an Airfix A-4 Skyhawk sheet). The stencils come from the Hasegawa OOB sheet.
Finally, the kit received an all-over coat of matt acrlyic varnish.
+++ 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 Saab 35 Draken ('The Kite' or 'The Dragon') was a Swedish fighter-interceptor developed and manufactured by Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget (SAAB) between 1955 and 1974. Development of the Saab 35 Draken started in 1948 as the Swedish air force future replacement for the then also in development Saab 29 Tunnan dayfighter and Saab 32B Lansen night fighter. It featured an innovative but unproven double delta wing, which led to the creation of a sub-scale test aircraft, the Saab 210, which was produced and flown to test this previously unexplored aerodynamic feature. The full-scale production version entered service with frontline squadrons of the Swedish Air Force on 8 March 1960. It received the designation Flygplan 35 (Fpl 35; 'Aeroplane 35') and was produced in several variants and types, most commonly as a fighter type with the prefix J (J 35), standing for Jaktflygplan (Pursuit-aircraft), the Swedish term for fighter aircraft.
The Saab 35 Draken was known for, among other things, its many "firsts" within aviation. It was the first Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the first fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe. Design-wise it was one of, if not the first, combat aircraft designed with double delta wings, being drawn up by early 1950. The unconventional wing design also had the side effect of making it the first known aircraft to perform and be capable of the Cobra maneuver. It was also one of the first Western-European-built aircraft to exceed Mach 2 in level flight, reaching it on 14 January 1960.
The Draken functioned as an effective supersonic fighter aircraft of the Cold War period. Even though the type was designed and intended as an interceptor, the Draken was considered to be a very capable dogfighter for the era, and its large wing area allowed the compact Saab 35 to carry a relatively high payload, too. In Swedish service, it underwent several upgrades, the ultimate of these being the J 35 J model which served until 1999. The Draken was also exported to several countries and remained operational in Austria until 2005.
In Swedish service, the Saab 35 was replaced by the Saab 37 “Viggen”. Development work on the new type was already initiated at Saab in 1952 and, following the selection of a radical canard delta wing configuration, the resulting aircraft performed its first flight on 8 February 1967 and entered service on 21 June 1971. However, being a radical and new design, the service introduction of the Viggen – esp. of its initial version, the AJ 37 fighter-bomber – was not without teething troubles, and in the late Sixties the Swedish Air Force expected an attack aircraft gap in its line-up. The former A 32 A Lansen attack aircraft were reaching the end of their airframe lifetime and were simply outdated, even though it was still needed as an anti-ship attack platform for the indigenous Rb 04 guided missile, so that Saab suggested an interim solution: the conversion of seventy of the 120 produced J 35 D fighters into dedicated attack aircraft, with the designation A 35 G (Gustav).
The Saab A 35 G was heavily modified to make it into a fighter bomber aircraft. Compared to the fighter versions the outer wings where completely redesigned and the aircraft featured 9 hardpoints in total. Airframe and landing gear were strengthened to cope with an increased payload of 10,000 lb (4,540 kg) vs. the fighters’ usual 6,393 lb (2,900 kg). Several airframe components were restored or replaced to extend the life of the aircraft, and the landing gear featured low-pressure tires for a better field performance on improvised/dispersed airfields.
A wide array of ordnance could be carried, such as bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber, MERs with up to six 100 kg (220 lb) bombs each, pods with unguided 75 mm or 135 mm rockets, single 14.5 cm psrak m49/56 high-explosive anti-tank rockets and, as a new weapon, the indigenous guided Rb 05 air-to-ground missile. This had been developed for the AJ 37 "Viggen in 1967 and was roughly comparable with the American AGM-12 Bullpup, but had some unique features. The Rb 05’s supersonic speed was deemed necessary to reduce the threat of surface-to-air missiles, and it allowed the missile to be deployed against slow/large aerial targets, too, making it a dual-purpose weapon. Consequently, the Rb 05’s fuze could be set by the pilot to impact mode for ground targets, or proximity mode for attacking air targets such as bombers.
The missile had a maximum range of 9 km (5.6 ml) and would usually be launched after a high-speed attack run on very low altitude and a climb to 400m for launch. Since the RB 05 was roll-stabilized, the aircraft did not need to be aimed straight at the target when launching and could immediately descend into terrain cover again, and this also made it possible to attack aerial targets from unusual angles and flight paths. Tracking the flares on the missile, the pilot would then visually guide the missile (the missile's engine was smokeless as to not obscure the view) with a small manual joystick towards the target. Guidance commands were transmitted to the missile via a jam-proof radio transmission link.
The A 35 G kept the J 35 D’s two 30 mm ADEN cannons, and a limited air defense capability was retained, too: the Gustav could carry up to four IR-guided Rb 24 (AIM-9B Sidewinder) AAMs, in addition to the Rb 05 in air-to-air mode. However, the aircraft lacked any air intercept radar, and had instead a Ferranti LRMTS (laser rangefinder and marked target seeker) and a counterweight installed in the nose, which resembled the S 35 E photo reconnaissance version’s nose, just without the windows for the side-looking cameras. For its attack role, the A 35 G received a new inertial navigation system, new altimeters and a ballistic computer from Saab called BT-9Rm, which worked with both bombs and rockets and even allowed for toss bombing. The Gustav Draken was furthermore fitted with electronic countermeasure (ECM) systems, a RHAWS and chaff and flare dispensers in their tail cones to improve its survivability over the battlefield.
The Gustav conversion program was accepted by the Swedish government in 1968. Work started in early 1969, the first revamped aircraft reached the operational units in late 1971. However, since production of the AJ 37 was starting at the same time, only 61 aircraft were eventually re-built from existing J 35 D airframes (one prototype and sixty production aircraft). Västgöta Wing (F 6) at Karlsborg was the first squadron to receive the A 35 G, replacing its A 32 A fighter bombers, the other unit to operate the type was Skaraborg Wing (F 7) at Såtenäs.
Among Sweden’s Draken fleet the Gustav was easy to recognize because it was the only version that carried the new “Fields & Meadows” splinter camouflage as standard livery. Service of the A 35 G lasted only until the early Eighties, though: as more and more AJ 37 all-weather fighter bombers reached the Swedish frontline units during the Seventies, the interim attack Draken, which was only effective under daylight and more or less good weather conditions, was withdrawn and either used for spares in the running J 35 J modernization program or directly scrapped, because many airframes had, suffering from the special stress of low-level flight operations, reached the end of their lifespan.
Another factor for the quick withdrawal was the disappointing performance of the type’s primary weapon, the Rb 05 missile: Its manual joystick steering in the cramped Draken cockpit (to be operated while the pilot was expected to fly at low altitude and evade enemy fire!) presented a number of problems, and the Rb 05’s ultimate accuracy was, even under ideal conditions, on the order of just 10 meters (33 ft), greater than desired. Targets like tanks or even ships were hard to hit with this level of scattering, combined with imminent danger for the pilot, and the air-to-air mode was even less effective. On the more modern Saab 37 the Rb 05 was therefore replaced by the Rb 75, a license-produced version of the American TV-guided AGM-65 Maverick “fire and forget” weapon. TV and laser seeker heads for the Rb 05 to improve the weapon’s accuracy and handling had been planned since the early Seventies, but were never realized.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 15.35 m (50 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 9.42 m (30 ft 11 in)
Height: 3.89 m (12 ft 9 in)
Wing area: 49.2 m² (530 ft²)
Airfoil: 5%
Empty weight: 8,175 kg (18,006 lb)
Gross weight: 11,500 kg (25,330 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 13,554 kg (29,845 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6C (license-built Rolls Royce Avon with Swedish EBK67 afterburner)
turbojet engine, 56.5 kN (12,700 lbf) thrust dry, 77.3 kN (17,240 lbf) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 2,150 km/h (1,335 mph, 1,168 kn) at 11,000 m (36,089 ft), clean
1,430 km/h (888 mph, 777 kn) w. two dop tanks and two 454 kg (1.00 lb) bombs
Range: 1.120 km (605 nmi; 696 mi); clean, internal fuel only
Ferry range: 2,750 km (1,480 nmi; 1,710 mi) with four external 500 l drop tanks
Service ceiling: 20,000 m (66,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 199 m/s (39,200 ft/min)
Wing loading: 231.6 kg/m² (47.4 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.7
Takeoff roll: 800 m (2,625 ft)
Armament:
2× 30 mm akan m/55 ADEN cannon with 100 rounds per gun
9× hardpoints with a total capacity of 4,500 kg (10.000 lb)
The kit and its assembly:
Even though the model depicts a what-if aircraft, the Draken’s proposed “Gustav” attack variant based on the J 35 D interceptor was real – even though I could not find much detail information about it. So, I took some inspiration from the contemporary Danish Saab 35XD export version, which probably had similar features to the Gustav? Another inspiring factor was a pair of Rb 05 missiles (from an Airfix Viggen) that I had bought with a spare parts lot some time ago – and an attack Draken would be the perfect carrier for these exotic (and unsuccessful) missiles.
For a low-budget build I used one of Mistercraft’s many recent re-boxings of the vintage Revell Draken from 1957(!), and this kit is nothing for those who are faint at heart. It is horrible.
The kit probably depicts a late J 35 A (already with a long tail section), but even for this variant it lacks details like the air scoops for the afterburner or a proper landing gear. The Draken’s characteristic tail wheel is also missing completely. Worst pitfall, however: there is NO interior at all, not even a lumpy seat! The canopy, the early model with struts, is disturbingly clean and crisp, though. The overall fit is mediocre at best, too – there are only a few visible seams, but any of them calls for filling and PSR. It’s a very toyish kit, even though the general outlines are O.K.
And the Mistercraft instructions are really audacious: they show all the parts that are actually NOT there at all. Suddenly a seat appears in the cockpit, a fin fairing from a J 35 D or later, or the tail wheel… And the decal sheets only roughly meet the aircraft you see in the painting instructions - there are three sheets, totally puzzled together, including material for aircraft not mentioned in the instructions, but that’s a common feature of most Mistercraft kits. But: how much can you taunt your disappointed customers?
So, this leaves lots of room for improvements, and calls for a lot of scratching and improvisation, too. First measure was to open both the air intakes (which end after 2mm in vertical walls) and the exhaust, which received an afterburner dummy deep inside to create depth. Next, I implanted a complete cockpit, consisting of s scratched dashboard (styrene sheet), the tub from an Italeri Bae Hawk trainer’s rear cockpit (which comes with neat side consoles and fits quite well) plus a shallow vintage ejection seat, probably left over from an early MiG from a KP kit or one of its many later reincarnations. As an alternative, there’s a Quickboost resin aftermarket set with a complete cockpit interior (even including side walls, IIRC intended to be used with the Hasegawa Draken) available but using it on this crappy kit would have been a waste of resources – it’s more expensive than the kit itself, and even with a fine cockpit the exterior would still remain sh!t.
Since I could not find any detail about the Gustav Draken’s equipment I gave it a laser rangefinder in a poor-fitting S 35 E (or is it a Danish export F-35?) nose that comes as an optional part with the vintage Revell mold – which is weird, because the recce Draken was built between 1963 and 1968 in 2 series, several years after the kit’s launch? Maybe the Mistercraft kit is based on the 1989 Revell re-boxing? But that kit also features an all-in-one pilot/seat part and a two-piece canopy… Weird!
Once the hull was closed many surface details had to be added. The afterburner air scoops were created from plastic profiles, which are aftermarket roof rails in H0 scale. Styrene profile material was also used to create the intakes behind the cockpit, better than nothing. The OOB pitot on the fin was very robust, and since it would be wrong on a J 35 D I cut it off and added a fairing to the fin tip, a shortened/modified ACMI pod, which bears a better pitot alternative at its tip. The pitot on the nose was scratched from heated styrene, since the kit offers no part at all.
Under the rear fuselage the whole tail wheel arrangement had to be scratched. The shallow fairing consists of a section from a Matchbox EA-6B drop tank, the wheel and its strut were tinkered together with bits from the scrap box and profile material. Not stellar, but better than OOB (= nothing!).
The landing gear struts were taken from the kit but beefed up with some details. The main wheels had to be replaced, the new ones come from a KP MiG-21, IIRC.
The ordnance consists of a pair of Rb 05’s from an Airfix Viggen, a pair of OOB drop tanks and MERs from a Matchbox A-7D, together with fourteen streamlined bombs from the same kit – twelve on the MERs and single bombs on the outer pylons. AFAIK, Sweden never used MERs on their aircraft, but the bombs come pretty close to some small bombs that I have seen as AJ 37 ordnance. Most pylons are OOB, I just added a single ventral station and two outer hardpoints under the wings. The Rb 05s received a prominent place under the air intakes on Sidewinder launch rails.
Painting and markings:
Finally a good excuse to apply the famous and complex “Fields & Meadows” paint scheme to a Draken model! However, this “combo” actually existed in real life, but only on a single aircraft: around 1980 a J 35 B (s/n 35520), aircraft “20” of F18, was painted in this fashion, but AFAIK it was only an instructional airframe. You find some pictures of this aircraft online but getting a clear three-side view (esp. from above!) as a reliable painting benchmark is impossible. However, a complete paint scheme of this aircraft is provided with one of Mistercraft’s Revell Draken re-boxings (not the one I bought, though), even though it is mismarked as a J 35 F of F10 in the instructions. One of the common Mistercraft errors, err, “surprises” (*sigh*).
Finding suitable model paints for the elaborate scheme is not easy, either, and after having applied it several times I stuck to my favorites: Humbrol 150 (Forest Green, FS 34127), 75 (Bronze Green), 118 (US Light Tan, FS 30219, a bit light but RAF Dark Earth is too somber) and Revell 06 (Tar Black, RAL 9021) on the upper surfaces and Humbrol 247 (RLM76) underneath.
A large ventral section was, typical for the J 35, left in bare metal, since leaking fuel and oil would frequently eat away any paint there. The section was painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with Matt Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol). As per usual, the model received an overall light black ink washing and some post-shading in order to emphasize the panels, correct the splinter camouflage and dramatize the surface. Some extra weathering was done around the gun ports and the jet nozzle with graphite.
Internal details like the cockpit and the landing gear were painted with the help of Swedish Saab 35 reference pictures. The cockpit tub was painted in a dark, bluish green (Humbrol 76) with grey-green (Revell 67) side walls.
The landing gear and its respective wells were painted in a bluish grey (Revell 57), parts of the struts were painted in a bright turquoise (a mix of Humbrol 89 and 80; looks quite weird, but I like such details!). The wheel hubs became medium grey (Revell 47). The Rb 05 missiles were painted in white as live weapons, so that they stand out well from the airframe. The drop tanks received the same blue-grey as the underside (Humbrol 247). MERs and launch rails were painted in a neutral grey (RAL 7001) and the bombs became olive drab (RAL 6014, Gelboliv) with yellow rings and golden fuzes.
Decals/markings were puzzled together from a Moose Republic Saab 32 sheet (unit code number and emblem) and the spares box, including the red tactical tail code from an Italeri 1:72 Gripen and roundels from a Hasegawa Draken. Stencils were taken from the kit’s OOB sheet and also from the Hasegawa Draken sheet. Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
What a horror trip! The paint scheme itself was/is challenging enough, but modding the crappy vintage Revell kit into something more presentable was already a fight in itself. However, I like the outcome. “Fields & Meadows” suits the Draken with its huge and flat upper surface well, and while the Gustav conversion did not take much effort the “mud mover” ordnance under this Mach 2 fighter really looks strange and makes you wonder what this is. A nice what-if model, despite its blurriness!
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
In 1948, a swept wing version of the F-84 was created with the hope of bringing performance to the level of the F-86. The last production F-84E was fitted with a swept tail, a new wing with 38.5 degrees of leading-edge sweep and 3.5 degrees of anhedral, and a J35-A-25 engine producing 5,300 pound-force (23.58 kN) of thrust. The aircraft was designated XF-96A and flew on 3 June 1950. Although the airplane was capable of 602 knots (693 mph, 1,115 km/h), the performance gain over the F-84E was considered minor. Nonetheless, it was ordered into production in July 1950 as the F-84F Thunderstreak. The F-84 designation was eventually retained because the fighter was expected to be a low-cost improvement of the straight-wing Thunderjet with over 55 percent commonality in tooling.
In the meantime, the USAF, hoping for improved high-altitude performance from a more powerful engine, arranged for the British Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine to be built in the United States as the Wright J65. To accommodate the larger engine, YF-84Fs with a British-built Sapphire as well as production F-84Fs with the J65 had a vertically stretched fuselage, with the air intake attaining an oval cross-section. Production quickly ran into problems, though. Although tooling commonality with the Thunderjet was supposed to be 55 %, but just 15 % of the tools could actually be re-used. To make matters worse, the F-84F utilized press-forged wing spars and ribs. At the time, only three presses in the United States could manufacture these, and priority was given to the Boeing B-47 Stratojet bomber over the F-84. The YJ65-W-1 engine was considered obsolete, too, and the improved J65-W-3 did not become available until 1954. When the first production F-84F flew on 22 November 1952, it was considered not ready for operational deployment due to control and stability problems. The first 275 aircraft, equipped with conventional stabilizer-elevator tailplanes, suffered from accelerated stall pitch-up and poor turning ability at combat speeds. Beginning with Block 25, the problem was improved upon by the introduction of a hydraulically powered one-piece stabilator. A number of aircraft were also retrofitted with spoilers for improved high-speed control. As a result, the F-84F was not declared operational until 12 May 1954.
The second YF-84F prototype was completed with wing-root air intakes. These were not adopted for the fighter due to loss of thrust, but this arrangement kept the nose section free and permitted placement of cameras, and the different design was adopted for the RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. Being largely identical to the F-84F, the Thunderflash suffered from the same production delays and engine problems, though, delaying operational service until March 1954.
During the F-84F’s development the Air Defense Command was looking for a replacement for the outdated F-94 ‘Starfire’ interceptor, a hasty development from the T-33 trainer airframe with an afterburner engine and an on-board radar. However, the F-94 was only armed with machine guns in its early versions or unguided missiles in its later incarnations, which were inadequate. An aircraft with better performance, ideally with supersonic speed, a better radar, and the ability to carry guided missiles (in the form if the AIR-1 and 2 ‘Falcon’ AAMs) as well as the AIR-2 ‘Genie’ missile was now requested.
The Douglas AIR-2 Genie followed a unique but effective concept that represented the technological state-of-the-art: it was an unguided air-to-air rocket with a 1.5 kt W25 nuclear warhead. The interception of Soviet strategic bombers was a major military preoccupation of the late 1940s and 1950s. The World War II-age fighter armament of machine guns and cannon were inadequate to stop attacks by massed bomber formations, which were expected to come in at high altitude and at high subsonic speed. Firing large volleys of unguided rockets into bomber formations was not much better, and true air-to-air missiles were in their infancy. In 1954 Douglas Aircraft began a program to investigate the possibility of a nuclear-armed air-to-air weapon. To ensure simplicity and reliability, the weapon would be unguided, since the large blast radius made precise accuracy unnecessary. Full-scale development began in 1955, with test firing of inert warhead rockets commencing in early 1956. The final design carried a 1.5-kiloton W25 nuclear warhead and was powered by a Thiokol SR49-TC-1 solid-fuel rocket engine of 162 kN (36,000 lbf) thrust, sufficient to accelerate the rocket to Mach 3.3 during its two-second burn. Total flight time was about 12 seconds, during which time the rocket covered 10 km (6.2 mi). Targeting, arming, and firing of the weapon were coordinated by the launch aircraft's fire-control system. Detonation was by time-delay fuze, although the fuzing mechanism would not arm the warhead until engine burn-out, to give the launch aircraft sufficient time to turn and escape. However, there was no mechanism for disarming the warhead after launch. Lethal radius of the blast was estimated to be about 300 meters (980 ft). Once fired, the Genie's short flight-time and large blast radius made it virtually impossible for a bomber to avoid destruction. The rocket entered service with the designation MB-1 Genie in 1957.
During the development phase the first carrier aircraft earmarked to carry the AIR-2 was the Northrop F-89 Scorpion, which had already been introduced in the early Fifties. While being an all-weather interceptor with on-board radar, it was a slow and large aircraft, and outdated like the F-94. Trying to keep the F-84 production lines busy, however, Republic saw the chance to design an all-weather interceptor aircraft that would surpass the F-89’s mediocre performance and meet the AIR-2 carrier requirements on the basis of the swept-wing (R)F-84F. To emphasize its dedicated interceptor role and set it apart from its fighter-bomber ancestors, the heavily modified aircraft was designated F-96B (even though it had little to do with the XF-96A that became the F-84F) and called ‘Thunderguard’.
The F-96B was largely based on the RF-84F’s airframe with its wing-root air intakes, what offered ample space in the aircraft’s nose for a radar system and other equipment. The radar was coupled with a state-of-the-art Hughes MC-10 fire control system. To relieve the pilot from operating the radar system one of the fuel cells behind the cockpit was deleted and a second crew member was placed behind him under an extended, strutless hood that opened to starboard. To compensate for the loss of fuel and maintain the F-84F’s range, a new tank was mounted under the cockpit floor in the aircraft’s center of gravity.
To improve performance and cope with the raised take-off weight, the F-96B was powered by an uprated Wright J65-W-18 turbojet, which generated 0.4 kN more dry thrust than the F-84F’s original J65-W-3 (7,700 lbf/34 kN). This was not too much, though, so that the J65 was additionally outfitted with an afterburner. With this upgrade the powerplant provided a maximum thrust of 10,500 lbf (47 kN), what resulted in a markedly improved rate of climb and the ability to break the sound barrier in level flight. The additional reheat section necessitated a wider and longer rear fuselage, which had to be redesigned. As an unintended side benefit, this new tail section reduced overall drag due to a slightly area-ruled coke-bottle shape behind the wings’ trailing edge, which was even emphasized through the ventral brake parachute fairing.
Armament consisted only of missiles, which were all carried externally on wing stations, all guns of the former F-84 versions were deleted to save weight. The F-96B’s weapons range included GAR-1/2/3/4 (Later re-designated as AIM-4) radar- and IR-guided Falcon air-to-air missiles and a pair of MB-1 Genie missiles. Up to four pods with nineteen unguided 2.75 in (70 mm) "Mighty Mouse" Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each were an alternative, too, and a pair of drop tanks were typically carried under the inner wings to provide the aircraft with sufficient range, since the new afterburner significantly increased fuel consumption.
Even though it was only a derivative design, the F-96B introduced a lot of innovations. One of these was the use of a diverertless supersonic inlet (DSI), a novel type of jet engine air intake to control air flow into their engines. Initial research into the DSI was done by Antonio Ferri in the 1950s. It consisted of a "bump" and a forward-swept inlet cowl, which worked together to divert boundary layer airflow away from the aircraft's engine. In the case of the F-96B this was realized as an inward-turning inlet with a variable contraction ratio. However, even though they had not been deemed necessary to guarantee a clean airflow, the F-96B’s air intakes were further modified with splitter plates to adapt them to the expected higher flight speeds and direct the air flow. The initial flight tests had also revealed a directional instability at high speed, due to the longer nose, so that the tail surfaces (both fin and stabilizers) were enlarged for the serial aircraft to compensate.
Another novel feature was an IRST sensor in front of the windscreen which augmented the on-board radar. This sensor, developed by Hughes International and designated ‘X-1’, was still very experimental, though, highly unreliable, and difficult to handle, because it relied on pressurized coolant to keep the sensor cold enough to operate properly, and dosing it at a consistent level proved to be difficult (if not impossible). On the other side the IRST allowed to track targets even in a massively radar-jammed environment. The 7” diameter silicone sensor was, together with the on-board radar, slaved to the fire control system so that its input could be used to lock guided missiles onto targets, primarily the GAR-1 and GAR-2 AAMs. The X-1 had a field of view of 70×140°, with an angular resolution of 1°, and operated in 2.5 micron wavelength range. When it worked properly the sensor was able to detect a B-47-sized aircraft’s tails aspect from 25 nm (29 ml/46 km) and a target of similar size from directly ahead from 10 nm (12 ml/19 km). Later, better developed versions of Hughes IRST, like the X-3 that was retrofitted to the F-101B in the early Sixties, had a better range and were more reliable.
During the Thunderguard’s development another competitor entered the stage, the F-101B Voodoo. In the late 1940s, the Air Force had already started a research project into the future interceptor aircraft that eventually settled on an advanced specification known as the 1954 interceptor. Contracts for this specification eventually resulted in the selection of the F-102 Delta Dagger, but by 1952 it was becoming clear that none of the parts of the specification other than the airframe would be ready by 1954; the engines, weapons, and fire control systems were all going to take too long to get into service. An effort was then started to quickly produce an interim supersonic design to replace the various subsonic interceptors then in service, and the F-101 airframe was selected as a starting point. Although McDonnell proposed the designation F-109 for the new aircraft (which was to be a substantial departure from the basic Voodoo fighter bomber), the USAF assigned the designation F-101B. Its development was protracted, so that the F-96B – even though it offered less performance – was ordered into production to fill the USAF’s urgent interceptor gap.
F-96B production started after a brief test phase in late 1957, and the first aircraft were delivered to the 60th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron in 1958. However, when it became clear that the F-101B would finally enter service in 1959, F-96B production was quickly cut down and the initial order of 300 aircraft reduced to only 150, which were produced until early 1960 in three batches. Only sixty were directly delivered to ADC units, because these were preferably equipped with the supersonic F-102A and the new F-101B, which could also carry the nuclear Genie missile. The rest was directly handed over to Air National Guard units – and even there they were quickly joined and replaced by the early ADC aircraft.
Operationally, almost all F-96Bs functioned under the US–Canadian North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), which protected North American airspace from Soviet intruders, particularly the threat posed by nuclear-armed bombers. In service, the F-96Bs were soon upgraded with a data link to the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system, allowing ground controllers to steer the aircraft towards its targets by making adjustments through the plane's autopilot. Furthermore, the F-96B was upgraded to allow the carrying of two GAR-11/AIM-26 Nuclear Falcon missiles instead of the Genies when they became available in 1961.
A handful F-96Bs were camouflaged during the late Sixties with the USAF’s new SEA scheme, but most aircraft retained their original bare metal finish with more or less colorful unit markings. Due to its limited capabilities and the introduction of the Mach 2 McDonnell F-4 Phantom, the last F-96B was retired from ANG service in 1971.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 54t 11 1/2 in (16,77 m) incl. pitot
Wingspan: 33 ft 7.25 in (10,25 m)
Height: 16 ft 9 in (5,11 m)
Wing area: 350 sq ft (37,55 m²)
Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6.264 kg)
Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9.541 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 28,000 lb (12.701 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Wright J65-W-18 turbojet with 8,600 lbf (34 kN) dry thrust and 10,500 lbf (47 kN) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 695 mph (1,119 km/h, 604 kn, Mach 1.1) at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)
Cruise speed: 577 mph (928 km/h, 501 kn)
Range: 810 mi (1,304 km, 704 nmi) combat radius with two droptanks
Service ceiling: 49,000 ft (15,000 m)
Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)
Wing loading: 86 lb/sq ft (423 kg/m²)
Armament:
No internal guns;
6× underwing hardpoints for a total ordnance load of up to 6,000lb (2,727 kg), including
a pair of 191.5 US gal (727 l) or 375 US gal (1.429 l) drop tanks on the inner stations
and a mix of AIM-4 Falcon (up to six), MB-1 Genie (up to two) and/or pods with
nineteen 2.75”/70 mm FFAR unguided missiles each (up to four) on the outer stations
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional missing link between the RF-84F and the F-105 was conceived for the Fifties Group Build at whatifmodellers.com, an era when the USAF used a wide variety of interceptor aircraft types and technical advancements were quick and significant – in just a decade the interceptor evolved from a subsonic machine gun-toting aircraft to a guided weapons carrier platform, capable of Mach 2.
The F-96B (I re-used Republic’s dropped designation for the swept-wing F-84F) was to display one of the many “in between” designs, and the (R)F-84F was just a suitable basis for a conversion similar to the T-33-derived F-94, just more capable and big enough to carry the nuclear Genie missile.
The basis became Italeri’s vintage RF-84F kit, a rather simple affair with raised panel lines and a mediocre fit, plus some sinkholes. This was, however, heavily modified!
Work started with the implantation of a new tandem cockpit, taken wholesale from a Heller T-33. Fitting the cockpit tub into the wider Thunderflash hull was a bit tricky, putty blobs held the implant in place. The canopy was taken from the T-33, too, just the RF-84F’s original rear side windows were cut away to offer sufficient length for the longer clear part and the cockpit side walls had to be raised to an even level with the smaller windscreen with the help of styrene strips. With these adapters the T-33 canopy fitted surprisingly well over the opening and blended well into the spine.
The camera nose section lost its tip, which was replaced with the tail cone from a Matchbox H.S. Buccaneer (actually its air brake), and the camera windows as well as the slant surfaces that held them were PSRed away for a conical shape that extended the new pointed radome. Lots of weight in the nose and under the cockpit floor ensured a safe stance on the OOB landing gear.
The rear section behind the air brakes became all-new; for an afterburner I extended and widened the tail section and implanted the rear part from a B-66 (Italeri kit, too) engine nacelle, which received a wider nozzle (left over from a Nakotne MiG-29, a featureless thing) and an interior.
To balance the longer nose I also decided to enlarge the tail surfaces and replaced the OOB fin and stabilizers with leftover parts from a Trumpeter Il-28 bomber – the fin was shortened and the stabilizers reduced in span to match the rest of the aircraft. Despite the exotic source the parts blend well into the F-84’s overall design!
To add supersonic credibility and to connect the design further with the later F-105 I modified the air intakes and cut them into a raked shape – quite easy to realize. Once the wings were in place, I also added small splitter plates, left over from an Airfix BAC Strikemaster.
As an interceptor the armament had to be adapted accordingly, and I procured the quartet of IR-guided Falcons as well as the Genie duo from an Academy F-89. The large drop tanks were taken OOB from the Italeri kit. The Genies were mounted onto their massive Scorpion pylons under the outer wings of the F-96B, while the Falcons, due to relatively little space left under the wings, required a scratched solution. I eventually settled for dual launchers on small pylons, mounted in front of the landing gear wells. The pylons originally belong to an ESCI Ka-34 “Hokum” helicopter kit (they were just short enough!), the launch rails are a halved pair of F-4 Sidewinder rails from a Hasegawa air-to-air weapons set. With everything on place the F-96B looks quite crowded.
Painting and markings:
The machine would represent a late Fifties USAF type, so that the paint options were rather limited if I wanted to be authentic. ADC Grey was introduced in the early Sixties, SEA camouflage even later, so that bare metal became a natural choice – but this can be quite attractive! The model received an overall coat with acrylic “White Aluminum” from the rattle can, plus some darked panels all over the hull (Humbrol 56 for good contrast) and an afterburner section in Revell 91 (Iron Metallic) and Humbrol’s Steel Metallizer. The radome became deep black, the anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen olive drab (Revell 46). Light grey (Revell 75) was used for some small di-electric fairings.
Interior surfaces (cockpit and landing gear wells) were painted with Zinc Chromate primer (I used Humbrol 80), while the landing gear struts became silver-grey (Humbrol 56) and the inside of the covers as well as the air brakes were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19).
Once basic painting was done the model received a black ink washing and was rubbed with grinded graphite to emphasize the raised panel lines, and the material adds a nice dark metallic shine to the silver base coat.
Another challenge was to find suitable unit markings for the Fifties era in the decal vault, which would also fit onto the model. After a long search I eventually settled for rather simple markings from a 325th FIS F-102 from an Xtradecal sheet, which only features a rather timid fin decoration.
Finding other suitable standard markings remained demanding, though. Stars-And-Bars as well as the USAF taglines were taken from the Academy F-89 that also provided the ordnance, most stencils were taken from the OOB Italeri sheet and complemented by small markings from the scrap box. The biggest problem was the creation of a matching serial number. The “FF” code was originally used for P/F-51D Mustangs during the Korea War, but after the type had been phased out it might have been re-used? The letters as well as the serial number digits were created from various markings for USAF F-100s, also from an Xtradecal sheet.
Once the decals had been applied the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish, except for the radome, the anti-glare panel as well as the walking areas on the wings as well as parts of the afterburner section, which were coated with matt varnish.
A rather straightforward conversion, even though finishing the project took longer than expected. But the result looks surprisingly natural and plausible. Lots of PSR was needed to modify the fuselage, though, especially the tail section was not easy to integrate into the Thunderflash’s hull. Sticking to the simple NMF livery paid IMHO out, too: the livery looks very natural and believable on the fictional aircraft, and it suits the F-84’s bulbous shape well.
Fighting Mono Bike Hound from Venus War.
Category: Model Kit.
Name: Fighting Mono Bike Hound.
Series: Battle Record of Venus.
Scale: 1/20 scale.
Origin: Venus Wars.
Brand: Wave.
Material: Styrene Plastic.
Release Date: Nov 2021.
Condition: Unassembled/Mint in Box.
Description: A styrene plastic injection-molded model kit of the Mono Bike Hound from the 1989 Japanese anime film "Venus Wars”. This brand-new model kit was supervise by its original designer, Hiroshi Yokoyama. Decals are included for its markings.
*Note: Pics not by us. It's just for reference.
This is a Model Kit collected by my BB.
More in My Collection Corner.
Somewhat surprised how well the Cricut handled slicing out BBS mesh from styrene plastic sheet. I hadn't expected this to work, so now I'm committed to figuring out how to do these for real. Took some trial and error to work out the cut pressures and pass counts to get a good crisp result that was both stable and easy to snap out (295 x2). The cuts are pretty intricate so I'm using a thin sheet stock (0.010") stacked in layers to build up depth in the hub center and spokes.
The fit in the Lego wheel and its center hub are bang on, nice and snug. Next, some finishing and then painting. Still scratching my head about how to do all the little bolts around the rim flange tho.