View allAll Photos Tagged styrene

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.

TLDR: super-detailed fully-modular Creator-scale build of epic early-90s Ferrari race-car version of street car version of a race car.

 

The F40 LM is the race car version of what was already mostly a race car. Nineteen competition-ready F40's were built by Chinetti Michelotto for Ferrari; lighter, lower, more powerful and full of racing-specific tweaks.

 

This project builds an LM inside the outlines of the TLG 10248 model. The kit's brilliant overall shaping and clever build solutions provide a framework for revised proportions and deeper detailing. Nearly every step of the build is altered and most assemblies have been heavily redesigned.

 

The LM-spec bodywork has an extended front splitter, fixed headlights, a top-vented front hood, taller rear wing and open mesh rear bodywork. The lengthened doors and repositioned fuel-tank pods were informed by Brickmonkey's modified build. The gray interior firewall was removed entirely, allowing the seats to be extended back along with the stretched doors.

 

The wheel inserts are fully scratch-built pieces, a rabbithole I went down when I discovered my Cricut could easily handle thin Styrene sheet.

 

This project was a first for me at this scale (well, since I was a kid anyway) and a blast to do. It went way, way deeper than I had intended; motivation and inspiration for what was possible came from the large-scale masterworks of Luca Rusconi, Carl Greatrix, Norton74, and Robert Alexander (also Biczzz’s Alfa, Gerald Cacas, Sir Manperson, and Alexander Paschoaletto). Aspiring to work up to that level has definitely boosted my confidence at this scale. Hope you enjoy checking it out.

 

Original base model: 1157 pcs.

As built, appx: 1270 pcs.

New parts delta (changed or added): 490 pcs (39%)

 

As a point of reference, I followed the spec of a particular F40 LM which underwent a comprehensive resto-mod; much larger intercoolers, dual wastegates and many other updates went into the build. It's all well documented here: www.build-threads.com/tag/Ferrari-F40-LM-Restoration/

+++ 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 BAC Jet Provost was a British jet trainer aircraft that was in use with the Royal Air Force (RAF) from 1955 to 1993. It was originally developed by Hunting Percival from the earlier piston engine-powered Percival Provost basic trainer, and later produced by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC). In addition to the multiple RAF orders, the Jet Provost, sometimes with light armament, was exported to many air forces worldwide. The design was also further developed into a more heavily armed ground attack variant under the name BAC Strikemaster, which was not operated by the Royal Air Force but became a worldwide export success.

 

The Jet Provost was produced for the Royal Air Force in several variants with gradually stronger engines and other detail improvements, the first trainers entered RAF service in 1955. A major development step was the T.5 variant in 1967 with a pressurized cabin, a modified front section and the option for export customers to arm it with machine guns and underwing hardpoints. The T.5 was fitted with the Viper 201 or 202 turbojet engine and its versatility encouraged the RAF to utilize the Jet Provost in more roles besides basic training. With a top speed of 440 mph, excellent maneuverability, mechanical reliability and low operating costs, the Jet Provost was utilized as an aerobatic aircraft, for air warfare and tactical weapons training as well as for advanced training. T.5 deliveries from BAC's Warton factory commenced on 3 September 1969, and operators of the type included the RAFs Central Flying School and No. 1, No. 3, and No. 6 Flying Training Schools. During their career the T.5s were modified with improved avionics and a rough coating on the wing to break up the smooth airflow and give the trainee pilot an early indication of the onset of a stall (the T.5's original clean wing gave the pilot little warning); upgraded aircraft were re- designated T.5A. A sub-variant, unofficially designated T.5B, was a small number of T.5As fitted with wingtip-tanks (so far only used by export customers) and special equipment for long-range low-level navigator training.

 

During the Mid-Eighties the RAF started to look for a more economical successor for the aging Jet Provost fleet, and this eventually became the turbo-prop Shorts Tucano. The Tucano was selected in 1985 in preference to the Swiss Pilatus PC-9 and the British Hunting Firecracker. The first Tucano flew in Brazil on 14 February 1986, with the first Shorts built production aircraft flying on 30 December 1986. However, problems with the ejection seats delayed the introduction of the aircraft into service until 1989. During this period the Jet Provost remained the RAF’s mainstay trainer, but it was gradually withdrawn from RAF service, mostly due to many airframes’ age. However, late in their career a handful of these robust aircraft eventually saw frontline use and were deployed in a hot conflict during the first Gulf War, in an unexpected but important role that paved the way for new air strike tactics.

 

When the RAF took part in combat operations during Operation Granby/Desert Storm in 1991, it had been anticipated that complex and fast attack aircraft like the Tornado would autonomously perform air strikes, either with iron bombs against area targets or with precision weapons like laser-guided glide bombs against important or small objects. However, early experience from the front lines showed that deploying precision weapons was not easy: target acquisition and then both target designation and weapon deployment were not feasible with just a single aircraft – it would be exposed to potential enemy fire for too long or require two or more passes over the target, so that any surprise moment was ruined. During the early stages of the RAF’s air raids a strike group of six aircraft would require two of them to act as dedicated target designators, selecting and illuminating targets with laser projectors for other aircraft. Another problem was that these scouts had to fly ahead of the strike force, check out the battlefield and loiter at relatively slow speed in hostile environment until the fast strike aircraft would arrive and drop their weapons. “Wasting” Tornados and their strike capability for these FAC duties was regarded as inefficient, and an alternative aircraft that was better suited for this task was chosen: the vintage but small and nimble Jet Provost T.5A!

 

Early on, this had been thought to be "unlikely”, but following a short-notice decision to deploy, the first batch of six aircraft were readied to deploy in under 72 hours. These were dedicated long-range navigational trainers, operated by 79(R) Squadron as part of No. 229 Operational Conversion Unit, and the aircraft were hastily prepared for their unusual mission. This included the removal of the aerodynamic wing coating to improve the flight characteristics again, the adoption of desert camouflage, mounting of underwing hardpoints and additional equipment like an encrypted radio with better range and navigation systems (including a GPS sensor in a spinal fairing). As protective measures, Kevlar mats were added to the cockpit floor and lower side walls, as well as a passive radar warning system with sensors on nose and fin and chaff/flare dispensers under the rear fuselage. A fixed refueling probe was considered for the transfer flight and to extend loiter time during missions via air-to-air refueling, but this was not realized due to the lack of time.

To mark their special status the machines were (now officially) designated T(R).5B. They departed from RAF Brawdy in Wales for the Middle Eastern theatre early on 26 January 1991. Upon arrival the machines were immediately thrown into action. It now became common for each attack formation to comprise four Tornados or Jaguars and two Jet Provosts; each Jet Provost carried a 144-inch-long (3.66 m), 420-lb (209 kg) AN/AVQ-23E ‘Pave Spike’ laser designator pod on one of the outer underwing stations and acted as backup to the other in the event of an equipment malfunction. The machines would typically not carry offensive loads, except for occasional unguided SNEB missiles to visually mark potential targets, since they did not have a sufficient load-carrying capacity, but they were frequently equipped with drop tanks to extend their range and loiter time, and “Dash 10” (AN/ALQ-101) ECM pods to counter radar-guided weapons against them.

 

The first combat mission already took place on 2 February 1991, operating at a medium altitude of roughly 18,000 feet (5,500 m), and successfully attacked the As Suwaira Road Bridge. Operations continued, practically every available day, even though missions did not take place at night as the RAF’s ’Pave Spike’ pods (a simplified version of the American AN/ASQ-153) lacked night-time functionality. After the first missions the Jet Provosts received black anti-glare-panels in front of the windscreen – they had been re-painted in the UK without them, and the black panel markedly reduced the camouflage’s efficiency, but the strong and constant sunshine reflection from the Jet Provosts’ bulged nose frequently blinded the crews. Another retrofitted feature was the addition of a video camera to document the targeting missions, which was mounted in a shallow blister on top of the nose, just above the landing light cluster.

 

When the tactical separation of target designation and strike missions proved to be successful, more and more potent aircraft were sent into the theatre of operations, namely the RAF’s Blackburn Buccaneer, which replaced the Jet Provosts on long-range missions and also carried out strike and dive-bombing missions. Approximately 20 road bridges were destroyed with the help of the target spotter aircraft, restricting the Iraqi Army's mobility and communications. In conjunction with the advance of Coalition ground forces into Iraq, the Buccaneers switched to airfield bombing missions, targeting bunkers, runways, and any aircraft sighted on the ground, while the Jet Provosts were used over less dangerous terrain and closer to the air bases, primarily acting as artillery spotters. However, the designator pods were still carried to mark targets of opportunity and strike aircraft were then called in to eliminate them.

 

The Jet Provost T(R).5Bs took part in 186 missions during the Gulf War. Two from the total of eight deployed Jet Provosts were lost during their short active career: One was shot down at low level by a MANPADS (probably an IR-guided 9K38 Igla/SA-18 Grouse), both crew members were lost; the other crashed due a failure of the hydraulic system but could be brought down over friendly terrain and the crew ejected safely.

After their return to Great Britain the worn machines were quickly phased out and all T(R).5Bs were retired when 79(R) Squadron was disbanded in August 1992. The last Jet Provosts in RAF service were retired in 1993.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)

Wingspan: 35 ft 4 in (10.77 m) with wingtip tanks

Height: 10 ft 2 in (3.10 m)

Wing area: 213.7 sq ft (19.85 m²)

Airfoil: root: NACA 23015 mod; tip: NACA 4412 mod

Empty weight: 4,888 lb (2,217 kg)

Gross weight: 6,989 lb (3,170 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 9,200 lb (4,173 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Armstrong Siddeley Viper Mk.202 turbojet engine, 2,500 lbf (11,1 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 382 kn (440 mph, 707 km/h) at 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Range: 780 nmi (900 mi, 1,440 km) with tip tanks

Service ceiling: 36,750 ft (11,200 m)

Rate of climb: 4,000 ft/min (20 m/s)

Wing loading: 32.7 lb/sq ft (160 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

No internal guns;

4× underwing hardpoints, each capable of carrying 540 lb (245 kg), for a wide range of loads,

including bombs, pods and launch rails with unguided missiles, gun pods;

the inner pair of pylons were plumbed for auxiliary tanks.

The T( R).5B was outfitted with an AN/AVQ-23E Pave Spike laser designator pod and an AN/ALQ-101

ECM pod on the outer stations, plus a pair of 75 Imp gallon (341 liter) drop tanks or pods with 28

unguided SNEB missiles on the inner pylons

  

The kit and its assembly:

This fictional Gulf War participant was a spontaneous decision to build – actually as a group build submission, but it turned out to be ineligible. After fellow user SPINNERS posted one of his CG skins, a grey RAF low-viz Jet Provost at whatifmodellers.com, I suggested in the respective thread a machine in Desert Pink – and it was promptly realized, including equipment from the Gulf War Buccaneers and LGBs as ordnance. Inspiration enough to dig out an Airfix kit out of The Stash™ for which I had no concrete plan yet and turn the CG rendition into hardware.

 

The kit is a simple affair and shows its age through (light) flash and shaggy fit around the seams almost everywhere. Nothing dramatic, but you have to invest time and PSR effort. And it features the most complicated landing light arrangement I have ever come across: five(!) single parts if you include the front cover. Why the mold designer did not just provide a single clear piece with three lens-shaped dents at the back - and instead went for a bulkhead, three(!) separate and tiny clear lenses PLUS a clear cover that is supposed to fit in a rather dysmorphic nose opening is beyond me?

 

The kit was basically built OOB, using the Jet Provost T.5 air intakes and fuselage details but the Strikemaster wing tip tanks and wing pylons. The Pave Spike pod came from a Hasegawa 1:72 aircraft weapon set, the ECM pod from a Revell 1:72 F-16A (the vintage kit of the prototype with the extra engine) – it is shorter than a typical AN/ALQ-101, rather looks like an AN/ALQ-119, but these pods were all modular and could have different lengths/sizes. And I think that the shorter variant suits the Jet provost well, the Pave Spike pod is already quite long for the small aircraft.

 

Unlike SPINNERS I settled just for drop tanks on the inner wing stations to extend range and loiter time. I also doubt that the Jet Provost had enough carrying capacity and speed for LGBs, and on their target designation missions the RAF Buccaneers did AFAIK not carry much offensive ordnance, either. There’s also not much clearance under a Jet Provost on the ground – I doubt that anything with big fins could safely go under it? However, for a modernized look I replaced the Jet Provost’s OOB teardrop-shaped tanks with cigar-shaped alternatives.

 

Further mods were only of cosmetic nature: the seats received ejection handles made from thin wire, the characteristic chines under the nose were omitted (the kit’s parts are rather robust, and they were left away on some T.5s in real life, anyway), and I scratched small conformal chaff/flare dispensers from styrene profile and put them under the lower rear fuselage. Fairings for a radar-warning system were scratched from 1.5 mm styrene rods, too, some blade antennae were added around the hull, and sprue material was used to create the GPS antenna “bubble” behind the cockpit. The shallow camera bulge on the nose was created in a similar fashion.

 

Another problem: the model is seriously tail-heavy. I filled the chamber between the odd landing lights compartment and the cockpit with lead beads, but once the landing gear had been attached the model still sat on its tail. I was lucky that I had not glued the seats into place yet, so I was able to add more ballast in front of the main wheels, therewith creating a bulkhead (which is missing OOB) behind the seats, what was eventually enough to shift the model’s center of gravity forward.

  

Painting and markings:

Desert Pink was the driving theme for this build (to be correct, it’s FS 30279 “Desert Sand”). While real RAF aircraft from Operation Granby were painted all-over with this tone (and SPINNERS did the same with the CG rendition), I wanted a bit more variety and just painted the upper surfaces and the underside of the leading edges, the inside of the air intakes and the tip tanks in the sand tone, while the undersides were painted in RAF Barley Grey (Humbrol 167), as if an late all-grey low-viz trainer had been painted over just on the upper surfaces.

For the Desert Pink I was able to use the authentic tone, I had a virgin tin of Humbrol 250 in my enamels hoard that now found a good use. After basic painting the kit received an overall black in washing, dry-brushing with Revell 35 (Skin – it’s a perfect match for panel post-shading!) to retain the pinkish hue and, after the decals had been applied, a bit of grinded graphite to simulate wear and dirt and emphasize the raised surface details.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Anthracite (Revell 06), the dashboard became medium grey with dark instruments (not painted, thanks to the raised details I simple rubbed some graphite over it, and the effect is nice!). The ejection seats became tar black with grey-green cushions. The landing gear was painted in Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165).

The drop tanks became Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165) and Barley Grey, as if they had been procured from a different aircraft, while the Pave Spike pod and the ECM pod were both in RAF Dark Green (Humbrol 163), for good contrast to the rest of the model.

 

Decals/markings come from Xtradecal sheets. The low-viz roundels were taken from a dedicated RAF roundel sheet because I wanted a uniform roundel size (in six positions) and slightly darker print colors. Unit markings and tactical codes came from a Jet Provost/Strikemaster sheet, also from Xtradecal; RAF 79 Squadron actually operated the Jet provost, but AFAIK only the T.4 version, but not the pressurized T.5 or even the T.5A navigator trainers. The nose art at bow side came from a USN EA-6B Prowler.

 

After some final details (position lights), the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A quick project, and the Operation Granby Jet Provost looks better than expected. However, I am not sold on the vintage Airfix kit. It clearly shows its age, nothing really went together smoothly, gaps and sinkholes, PSR on every seam. It also required tons of nose weight to keep it on its spindly legs. The alternative Matchbox kit is not much better, though, with even more simple surface and cockpit details, but at least the parts fit together. I might try to hunt down a Sword kit if I should want to build one again, AFAIK the only other IP option? The result looks interesting, though, quite purposeful with its low-viz markings, and the simple livery turns out to be very effective over the desert terrain where it would have been supposed to operate. Furthermore, the model fits well into the Jet Provost’s historic final years of duty with the RAF – even though in an unlikely role!

+++ 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.

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. It was preceded into production 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 was 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.

 

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 minor variants (designated A, D, J, and S) with constant updates and several sub-variants during its long and successful career. Its success was increased by the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie and FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie weapon systems, the latter enabling the fighter to operate in space.

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1A continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system (notably on the Lunar facility Apollo Base) and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary VF of the UN Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

 

One notable operator of the VF-1 was the U.N. Spacy's Zentraedi Fleet, namely SVF-789, which was founded in 2012 as a cultural integration and training squadron with two flights of VF-1 at Tefé in Brazil. This mixed all-Zentraedi/Meltraedi unit was the first in the UN Spacy’s Zentraedi Fleet to be completely equipped with the 1st generation Valkyrie (other units, like SVF-122, which was made up exclusively from Zentraedi loyalists, kept a mixed lot of vehicles).

 

SVF-789’s flight leaders and some of its instructors were all former Quadrono Battalion aces (under the command of the famous Milia Fallyna, later married with aforementioned Maximilian Jenius), e. g. the Meltraedi pilot Taqisha T’saqeel who commanded SVF-789’s 3rd Flight.

 

Almost all future Zentraedi and Meltradi pilots for the U.N. Spacy received their training at Tefé, and the squadron was soon expanded to a total of five flights. During this early phase of the squadron's long career the VF-1s carried a characteristic dark-green wrap-around scheme, frequently decorated with colorful trim, reflecting the unit’s Zentraedi/Meltraedi heritage (the squadron’s motto and title “Dar es Carrack” meant “Victory is everywhere”) and boldly representing the individual flights.

 

In late 2013 the unit embarked upon Breetai Kridanik’s Nupetiet-Vergnitzs-Class Fleet Command Battleship, and the machines received a standard all-grey livery, even though some typical decoration (e. g. the squadron code in Zentraedi symbols) remained.

 

When the UN Spacy eventually mothballed the majority of its legacy Zentraedi ships, the unit was re-assigned to the Tokugawa-class Super Dimensional Carrier UES Xerxes. In 2022, SVF-789 left the Sol System as part of the Pioneer Mission. By this time it had been made part of the Expeditionary Marine Corps and re-equipped with VAF-6 Alphas.

 

The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters.

 

The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68) and ongoing modernization programs like the “Plus” MLU update that incorporated stronger engines and avionics from the VF-1’s successor, the VF-4 (including the more powerful radar, IRST sensor and a laser designator/range finder). These updates later led to the VF-1N, P an X variants.

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:

Equipment Type: all-environment variable fighter and tactical combat battroid

Government: U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force

 

Accommodation: pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

Dimensions:

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (fully extended)

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

 

Powerplant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2008 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)

4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18 x 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.

Minimum time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

Armament:

2x internal 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 rds fired at 1,200 rds/min

4 x 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 15x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,

or a combination of above load-outs

Optional Armament:

Shinnakasu Heavy Industry GBP-1S ground-combat protector weapon system, or

Shinnakasu Heavy Industry FAST Pack augmentative space weapon system

  

The kit and its assembly:

The second vintage 1:100 ARII VF-1 as a part of a Zentraedi squadron series, the canonical SVF-789. This one was inspired by a profile of such a machine in the “Macross Variable Fighter Master File: VF-1 Valkyrie Part 1” Art Book – true robot porn and full of valuable detail and background material for anyone who’d consider building a VF-1.

 

The SVF-789 machine shown in the book is a simple VF-1A, but with Zentraedi language markings and in a rather unusual livery in all dark green, yellow and black trim and grey low-viz roundels. While this does IMHO not really look sexy, I found the idea of a squadron, manned by former (alien) enemies very interesting. And so I took up the idea and started fleshing it out – including the idea of SVF-789’s initial base deep in the Amazonian jungle (justifying somehow the all-green livery!?).

 

This second build was to represent a flight leader’s aircraft, and consequently the basis is a VF-1J kit (which only differs outwardly through the head). In order to set the machine a little more apart I decided to incorporate some “Plus” program updates, including a different nose tip for the updated radar and two small fairings for IRST and laser designator sensors above and below the nose section, respectively. The fins’ tips were also modified – they were elongated a little through styrene sheet replacements.

This update is a bit early for the official Macross timeline, but I just wanted more than a standard J Valkyrie in a more exotic paint scheme.

 

Otherwise, this VF-1J fighter kit was built OOB, with the landing gear tucked up and the usual additions of some blade antennae, a pilot figure and a custom display stand in/under the ventral cannon pod.

The ordnance is non-standard, though; in this case the aircraft received two pairs of air-to-ground missiles (actually some misshapen Soviet AAMs from the Academy MiG-23 kit – either very fat R-60 ‘Aphid’ AAMs or very poor renditions of vintage K-6 ‘Alkali’ missiles?) inboards and four AMM-1 missiles on the outer pylons, with the lowest missile replaced by scratched ECM and chaff dispenser pods. The gun pod was also modified with a new nozzle, with parts from a surplus AMM-1 missile – also inspired by a source book entry.

  

Painting and markings:

This was planned to be a more exotic or extravagant interpretation of the profile from the book, which was already used as a guideline for the VF-1A build. The overall design of an all-green livery with a white nose tip as basis was kept, together with yellow trim on wings, fins and the stabilizer fins on the Valkyrie’s legs. The VF-1A already deviated from this slightly, but now I wanted something more outstanding – a bold flight leader’s mount.

 

Zentraedi vehicles tend to be rather colorful, so the tones I chose for painting were rather bright. For instance, the initial idea for the green was FS 34079, a tone which also comes close to the printed profile in the book. But it looked IMHO too militaristic, or too little anime-esque, so I eventually settled for something brighter and used Humbrol 195 (called Dark Satin Green, but it’s actually RAL 6020, Chromoxyd Grün, a color used on German railway wagons during and after WWII), later shaded with black ink for the engravings and Humbrol 76 (Uniform Green) for highlights.

The nose became pure white, the leading edge trim was painted with Revell 310 (Lufthansa Gelb, RAL 1028), a deep and rich tone that stands out well from the murky green.

 

In order to set this J Valkyrie apart from the all-dark green basic VF-1As, I added two bright green tones and a light purple as flight color: Humbrol 36 (called Pastel Green, but it’s actually very yellow-ish), 38 (Lime) and Napoleonic Violet from ModelMaster’s Authentic Line, respectively. 36 was applied to the lower legs and around the cockpit section, including the spinal fairing with the air brake. The slightly darker 38 was used on the wings and fins as well as for the fuselage’s and wings’ underside. On top of the wings and the inner and outer fins, the surfaces were segmented, with the dark green as basic color.

As an additional contrast, the head, shoulder guards and additional trim highlights on the legs as well as for a double chevron on the breast plate were painted in the pale purple tone. A sick color combination, but very Zentraedi/Meltraedi-esque!

 

The cockpit interior was, according to Macross references, painted in Dark Gull Grey. The seat received brown cushions and the pilot figure was turned into a micronized Meltraedi (yes, the fictional pilot Taqisha T’saqeel is to be female) with a colorful jumpsuit in violet and white, plus a white and red helmet – and bright green skin! The gun pod became dark blue (Humbrol 112, Field Blue), the AMM-1 missiles received a pale grey livery while the air-to-ground missiles and the chaff dispenser became olive drab. As an additional contrast, the ECM pod became white. A wild mix of colors!

 

This was even enhanced through U.N. Spacy roundels in standard full color – their red really stands out. The squadron emblem/symbol on the fin was painted with a brush, but in this case in a smaller variant and with two USN/USAF style code letters for the home basis added.

Since I can not print white letters onto clear decal sheet at home, the aircraft’s tactical code ‘300’ was created with letters from the human alphabet. A simplification and deviation from the original concept, but I found the only alternative of painting tiny and delicate Zentraedi codes by brush and hand just to be too risky.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with a sheen acrylic varnish – with the many, contrasting colors a pure matt finish somehow did not appear right.

  

Building was relatively simple, just the rhinoplasty was a little tricky – a very subtle modification, though, but the pointed and slightly deeper nose changed the VF-1’s look. The standard Zentraedi-style VF-1 of SVF-789 already looked …different, but this one is … bright, if not challenging to the naked eye. Anyway, there’s more in the creative pipeline from the Zentraedi unit – this aircraft’s pilot in the form of a modified resin garage kit.

04 - Earth Federation Andromeda - Class 3rd Ship Apollo Norm.

Category: Model Kit.

Name: Earth Federation Andromeda - Class 3rd Ship Apollo Norm.

Scale: Non.

Series: Mecha Collection.

Origin: Space Battleship Yamato 2202.

Brand: Bandai.

Material: Styrene plastic.

Release Date: May 2018.

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:

Following World War II the Allies dissolved the Wehrmacht with all its branches on 20 August 1946. However, already one year after the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany in May 1949 and because of its increasing links with the West, the Consultative Assembly of Europe began to consider the formation of a European Defence Community with German participation on 11 August 1950.

 

By March 1954, plans for a new German army had become concrete and foresaw the formation of six infantry, four armored, and two mechanized infantry divisions, as the German contribution to the defense of Western Europe in the framework of a European Defence Community. Following a decision at the London Nine Power Conference of 28 September to 3 October 1954, Germany's entry into NATO effective from 9 May 1955 was accepted as a replacement for the failed European Defence Community plan.

 

The official founding date of the German army was 12 November 1955 when the first soldiers began their service in Andernach, even though preparations began earlier. In 1956, the first troops set up seven training companies in Andernach and began the formation of schools and training centers. On 1 April 1957, the first conscripts arrived for service in the army. The first military organisations created were instructional battalions, officer schools, and the Army Academy, the forerunner to the Führungsakademie der Bundeswehr in Hamburg. In total twelve armored and infantry divisions were to be established by 1959, as planned in Army Structure I. To achieve this goal, existing units were split approximately every six months. However, the creation of all twelve divisions did not take place until 1965. At the end of 1958 the strength of the army was about 100,000 men.

 

Concerning vehicles, the German army was equipped at first with American material, such as the M47 Patton main battle tank or M7 Priest SPGs. Lighter vehicles, like the “Schützenpanzer Kurz 11-2” family or the “Schützenpanzer Lang HS-30” AFV, were developed and/or produced with foreign support. Additionally, also as a measure to bring the German industry back into business and to fill equipment gaps, some leftover vehicles from WWII were modernized and put back into service. One of these vehicles was the so-called “Spähpanzer Puma (Neu)”, an update of the highly successful SdKfz. 234/2 8x8 heavy reconnaissance vehicle, one of the best armored scout vehicles during WWII.

 

Germany had a long and successful history of heavy 8x8 scout cars, starting with the SdKfz. 231 in the Thirties. The Sd.Kfz. 234 was the final development of this vehicle family that actually made it into service. For its time, the Sd.Kfz. 234 incorporated several innovative features, including a monocoque chassis (instead of a classic frame with a hull mounted on top), an independent suspension on each wheel and an air-cooled Tatra 103 diesel engine (at the time of the vehicle’s design all German armored vehicles were powered by gasoline engines) with a net power of 220 hp@2,250 rpm and a very good power-to-weight ratio of 21 hp/ton. This engine gave also the vehicle an extraordinary range of more than 600 miles (1.000 km). The reason behind this was that the SdKfz. 234 was originally intended for use in North Africa, but it came into service in late 1942 and was therefore too late for this theatre of operations. Furthermore, the vehicle featured eight-wheel steering and drive and was able to change direction quickly thanks to a second, rear-facing, driver's seat. Despite its late service introduction, the SdKfz. 234 nevertheless proved useful on the Eastern and Western Fronts. It was quite formidable, commonly used in pairs, one equipped with a long-range radio communications kit while the other possessed only a short-range radio.

 

A small number of SdKfz. 234s survived the wartime on German soil and had been stashed away as a reserve. Their reactivation for the nascent Bundeswehr in the Fifties covered the replacement of the outdated Tatra engine, for which no spare parts were available anymore, with an air-cooled, supercharged Magirus-Deutz V8 Diesel engine. It had less power (125 kW/180 hp) than the former Tatra V12, but was more reliable and offered more torque and an even better mileage. Furthermore, this was basically a standard engine that was widely used in civil lorries and many other military vehicles of the time, including those operated by the West-German Bundesheer, too. Thanks to the smaller size of the new engine, sound-damping materials could be added and the exhaust system was optimized, so that the vehicle’s noise level was considerably reduced. The additional internal space was also used for two communication kits: a short-range radio was installed in the new turret (see below), while a long-range radio kit was placed into the hull, next to the rear driver.

The suspension was modernized and beefed up, too, with heavy duty shock absorbers, wider wheels and a pressure control system, so that ground pressure could be reduced by the crew from the inside of the vehicle for an adaptable, improved on- and off-road performance. The SdKfz. 234’s crew of four in its former positions was retained, including the second, backwards-facing steering wheel for the radio operator.

 

Since the West German SdKfz. 234 survivor fleet consisted of different body variants (mostly with open hulls and just two former SdKfz. 234/2s with a closed turret) and vehicles in various states of completion, hull and the armament were unified for the Puma (Neu): all revamped vehicles received a newly developed, welded two-man turret with a low profile. The commander on the left side did not have a cupola, but his position was slightly raised and no less than seven mirrors plus a forward-facing infrared sight for night operations allowed a very good field of view. Both crewmen in the hull also received additional three mirrors above their workstations for a better field of view while driving.

 

Main weapon of the Puma (Neu) became a 20 mm Rheinmetall MK 20 Rh202 autocannon, a license-built Hispano-Suiza 820 L/85, together with a co-axial 7.62 mm MG42/57 light machine gun. The MK 20 was a common anti-aircraft weapon at the time and mounted to other Bundeswehr vehicles like the HS-30 AFV, too. It could fire HE and AP rounds at 800–1000 RPM, making it efficient against lightly armored vehicles (25-30 mm of armor) at up to 1,500 m range, with a maximum range of 2,000 m. 750 rounds of 20 mm ammunition were carried, even though ammunition feed had to be changed manually. The weapons were not stabilized, but they had a 15x15 periscopic sight and could be elevated between -5° and + 75°, so that it could be aimed at both ground and air targets. Three additional smoke grenade launchers per turret side were provided for tactical and emergency concealment.

 

Only a small number (40 plus two prototypes) of Spähpanzer Puma (Neu) were eventually converted or re-build from spares, but they became in 1957 the launch equipment of the Bundeswehr’s armored reconnaissance brigades, together with M8 Greyhound scout cars donated by the USA, even though the latter were soon complemented and replaced by tracked vehicles, based on the Schützenpanzer Kurz. However, due to their high road speed and excellent range, the Puma (Neu) scout cars were popular and remained in service until the late Seventies, when a new generation of 8x8 reconnaissance vehicles in the form of the amphibious Spähpanzer Luchs was introduced and replaced all 1st generation Bundeswehr vehicles.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Four (commander, gunner, driver, radio operator/2nd driver)

Weight: 10.500 kg (23,148 lbs)

Length: 6.02 m (19 ft 9 in)

Width: 2.36 m (7 ft 9 in)

Height: 2.84 metres (9 ft 4 in)

Suspension: Independent on each wheel, with leaf springs

Track width: 1.95 m (6 ft 4 1/2 in)

Wading depth: 1.2 m (3 ft 11 in)

Trench crossing capability: 2m (6 ft 6 1/2 in)

Ground clearance: 350 mm (13 3/4 in)

Climbing capability: 30°

Fuel capacity: 240 l

 

Armor:

9-30 mm (.35-1.18 in) steel armor

 

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 80 km/h (49 mph)

Operational range: 800 km (500 mi)

Fuel consumption: 30 l/100 km on roads, 45 l/100 km off-road

Power/weight: 17 PS/t

 

Engine:

Air-cooled, supercharged 10,622 cc (648³ in) Magirus-Deutz F8L 614K V8 diesel engine,

with 132 kW (180 hp) output at 2.500 RPM

 

Transmission:

Büssing-NAG "GS" with 6 forward and reverse gears, eight-wheel drive

 

Armament:

1× 20 mm (0.79 in) Rheinmetall (Hispano-Suiza) MK 20 Rh202 autocannon with 750 rounds

1× co-axial 7.62 mm MG42/57 light machine gun 2.000 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

This German 8x8 vehicle is a contribution to the “Back into service” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com in late 2019. Beyond aircraft I also thought about (armored) vehicles that could fit into this theme, and the SdKfz. 234/2 “Puma” (even though this popular name was never official!) came to my mind, because it was a very effective vehicle with many modern features for its time. So, what could a modernized Puma for the young Bundeswehr look like…?

 

The starting point became the very nice Hasegawa SdKfz. 234/2 kit, which did not – except for some PSR between the hull halves – pose any complications. I did not want to change too much for the Bundeswehr update, but new/wider wheels and a new, more modern turret with a light post-war weapon appeared sensible.

 

The wheels come from a ModelTrans aftermarket resin set for the LAV-25 – they are quite modern, but they do not look out of place. Their different, more solid style as well as the slightly bigger diameter and the wider tires change the Puma’s look considerably. In order to mount them, I modified the suspension and cut away the former attachment point on the four axles, replacing them with thin, die-punched styrene discs. This reduced the track width far enough so that the new, wider wheels would fit under the original mudguards. It’s a tight arrangement, but does not look implausible. The spare wheel, normally mounted to the vehicle’s rear, was omitted.

 

The turret was taken from a Revell “Luchs” Spähpanzer kit, but simplified so that it would have a more vintage look. For instance, the machine gun ring mount above the commander’s hatch was omitted, as well as the rotating warning light and the modern smoke grenade dischargers. The latter were replaced by the WWII triple dischargers from the Hasegawa kit, for a more vintage look.

To my astonishment, the Luchs turret was easy to mate with the Puma chassis: its attachment ring diameter was almost identical! The new part could be attached almost without a problem or modification. I just added some reinforcements to the hull’s flanks, since the Luchs turret is slightly wider than the SdKfz. 234/2’s horseshoe-shaped turret. Beyond that, only small, cosmetic things were added, like mirror fairings for both drivers above their workstations, license plates at the front and the rear and antennae.

  

Painting and markings:

Creating an early Bundeswehr vehicle is a simple task, because there is only one potential color option until the Eighties: a uniform livery in Gelboliv (RAL 6014). Due to the livery’s simplicity, I used a rattle can to paint hull, turret and wheels separately.

 

After some detail painting, a very dark brown wash with acrylic paint and some post shading with Revell 42 (also Gelboliv, but a rather greenish and bright interpretation of the tone) as well as dry-brushing with Revell 46 and 45 along the many edges were used to weather the model and emphasize details. After decals had been applied (mostly from a Peddinghaus sheet for early Bundeswehr vehicles, plus some tactical markings from the Revell Luchs), the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

 

Once dry and completed, some artist pigments were added around the wheels and lower hull in order to simulate dust and dirt. On the lower chassis, some pigments were also "cluttered" onto small patches of the acrylic varnish, so that the stuff soaks it up, builds volume and becomes solid - the perfect simulation of dry mud crusts. I found the uniform livery to look quite dull, so I added some branches (real moss, spray-painted with dark green acrylic paint from a rattle can) to the hull – a frequent field practice.

  

This was a very quick project – in fact, the model was completed in the course of just one evening, and painting it was a quick affair, too, lasting only another day. However, I like the result. The SdKfz. 234/2 already had a quite modern look in its original guise, but the new wheels and the Luchs turret change its look considerably, it really has an even more modern feel that fits well into the early Bundeswehr era.

 

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.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!

 

Some background:

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 (Russian: Микоян и Гуревич МиГ-19) (NATO reporting name: "Farmer") was a Soviet second-generation, single-seat, twin jet-engined fighter aircraft. It was the first Soviet production aircraft capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. It was, more oe less, the counterpart of the North American F-100 Super Sabre, although the MiG-19 would primarily oppose the more modern McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and Republic F-105 Thunderchief over North Vietnam.

 

On 20 April 1951, OKB-155 was given the order to develop the MiG-17 into a new fighter called "I-340", which was to be powered by two Mikulin AM-5 non-afterburning jet engines (a scaled-down version of the Mikulin AM-3) with 19.6 kN (4,410 lbf) of thrust. The I-340 was supposed to attain 1,160 km/h (725 mph, Mach 1) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft), 1,080 km/h (675 mph, Mach 0.97) at 10,000 m (32,808 ft), climb to 10,000 m (32,808 ft) in 2.9 minutes, and have a service ceiling of no less than 17,500 m (57,415 ft).

The new fighter, internally designated "SM-1", was designed around the "SI-02" airframe (a MiG-17 prototype) modified to accept two engines in a side-by-side arrangement and was completed in March 1952.

 

Initial enthusiasm for the aircraft was dampened by several problems. The most alarming of these was the danger of a midair explosion due to overheating of the fuselage fuel tanks located between the engines. Deployment of airbrakes at high speeds caused a high-g pitch-up. Elevators lacked authority at supersonic speeds. The high landing speed of 230 km/h (145 mph) (compared to 160 km/h (100 mph) in the MiG-15), combined with absence of a two-seat trainer version, slowed pilot transition to the type. Handling problems were addressed with the second prototype, "SM-9/2", which added a third ventral airbrake and introduced all-moving tailplanes with a damper to prevent pilot-induced oscillations at subsonic speeds. It flew on 16 September 1954, and entered production as the MiG-19S.

 

Approximately 5.500 MiG-19s were produced, first in the USSR and in Czechoslovakia as the Avia S-105, but mainly in the People's Republic of China as the Shenyang J-6. The aircraft saw service with a number of other national air forces, including those of Cuba, North Vietnam, Egypt, Pakistan, and North Korea. The aircraft saw combat during the Vietnam War, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1971 Bangladesh War.

 

All Soviet-built MiG-19 variants were single-seaters only, although the Chinese later developed the JJ-6 trainer version of the Shenyang J-6. Among the original "Farmer" variants were also several radar-equipped all-weather fighters and the MiG-19R, a reconnaissance version of the MiG-19S with cameras replacing the nose cannon in a canoe-shaped fairing under the forward fuselage and powered by uprated RD-9BF-1 engines with about 10% more dry thrust and an improved afterburner system.

 

The MiG19R was intended for low/medium altitude photo reconnaissance. Four AFA-39 daylight cameras (one facing forward, one vertical and two obliquely mounted) were carried. Nighttime operations were only enabled through flare bombs, up to four could be carried on four hardpoints under the wings, even though the outer "wet" pylons were frequently occupied by a pair of 800l drop tanks.

 

The MiG-19R was not produced in large numbers and only a few were operated outside of the Soviet Union. The NATO reporting name remained unchanged (Farmer C). A recon variant of the MiG-19 stayed on many air forces' agendas, even though only the original, Soviet type was actually produced. Czechoslovakia developed an indigenous reconnaissance variant, but it did not enter series production, as well as Chinese J-6 variants, which only reached the prototype stage.

 

One of the MiG-19R's few foreign operators was the Polish Navy. The Polish Air Force had received a total of 22 MiG-19P and 14 MiG-19PM interceptors in 1957 (locally dubbed Lim-7), and at that time photo reconnaissance for both Air Force and Navy was covered by a version of the MiG-17 (Lim-5R). Especially the Polish Navy was interested in a faster aircraft for quick identification missions over the Baltic Sea, and so six MiG-19R from Soviet stock were bought in 1960 for the Polish Navy air arm.

 

Anyway, Poland generally regarded the MiG-19 family only as an interim solution until more potent types like the MiG-21 became available. Therefore, most of the fighters were already sold to Bulgaria in 1965/66, and any remaining Farmer fighters in Polish Air Force Service were phased out by 1974.

 

The Polish Navy MiG-19R were kept in service until 1982 through the 3rd Group of the 7th Polish Naval Squadron (PLS), even though only a quartet remained since two Lim-7R, how the type was called in Poland, had been lost through accidents during the early 70ies. Ironically, the older Lim6R (a domestic photo reconnaissance variant of the license-built MiG-17 fighter bomber) was even kept in service until the late 80ies, but eventually all these aircraft were replaced by MiG-21R and Su-22M4R.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: One

Length: 12.54 m (41 ft)

Wingspan: 9.0 m (29 ft 6 in)

Height: 3.9 m (12 ft 10 in)

Wing area: 25.0 m² (270 ft²)

Empty weight: 5,447 kg (11,983 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 7,560 kg (16,632 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Tumansky RD-9BF-1 afterburning turbojets, 31.9 kN (7,178 lbf) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1.500 km/h (930 mph)

Range: 1,390 km (860 mi) 2,200 km with external tanks

Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,425 ft/min)

Wing loading: 302.4 kg/m² (61.6 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

2x 30 mm NR-30 cannons in the wing roots with 75 RPG

4x underwing pylons, with a maximum load of 1.000 kg (2.205 lb);

typically only 2 drop tanks were carried, or pods with flare missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

Again, a rather subtle whif. The MiG-19R existed, but was only produced in small numbers and AFAIK only operated by the Soviet Union. Conversions of license-built machines in Czechoslovakia and China never went it beyond prototype stage.

 

Beyond that, there’s no kit of the recon variant, even pictures of real aircraft are hard to find for refefence – so I decided to convert a vintage Kovozavody/KP Models MiG-19S fighter from the pile into this exotic Farmer variant.

 

Overall, the old KP kit is not bad at all, even though you get raised details, lots of flash and mediocre fit, the pilot's seat is rather funny. Yes, today’s standards are different, but anything you could ask for is there. The kit is more complete than a lot of more modern offerings and the resulting representation of a MiG-19 is IMHO good.

 

Mods I made are minimal. Most prominent feature is the camera fairing in place of the fuselage cannon, scratched from a massive weapon pylon (Academy F-104G). Probably turned out a bit too large and pronounced, but it’s whifworld, after all!

 

Other detail changes include new main wheels (from a Revell G.91), some added/scratched details in the cockpit with an opened canopy, and extra air scoops on the fuselage for the uprated engines. The drop tanks are OOB, I just added the small stabilizer pylons from styrene sheet.

 

Other pimp additions are scratched cannons (made from Q-Tips!), and inside of the exhausts the rear wall was drilled up and afterburner dummies (wheels from a Panzer IV) inserted - even though you can hardly see that at all...

  

Painting and markings:

This is where the fun actually begins. ANY of the few MiG-19 in Polish service I have ever seen was left in a bare metal finish, and the Polish Navy actually never operated the type.

 

Anyway, the naval forces make a good excuse for a camouflaged machine – and the fact that the naval service used rather complex patterns with weird colors on its machines (e. g. on MiG-17, MiG-15 UTI or PZL Iskras and An-2) made this topic even more interesting, and colorful.

 

My paint scheme is a mix of various real world aircraft “designs”. Four(!) upper colors were typical. I ended up with:

• Dark Grey (FS 36118, Modelmaster)

• Dark Green (RAF Dark Green, Modelmaster)

• Blue-Green-Grey (Fulcrum Green-Grey, Modelmaster)

• Greenish Ochre (a mix of Humbrol 84 and Zinc Chromate Green, Modelmaster)

 

Plus…

• Light Blue undersides (FS 35414, Modelmaster, also taken into the air intake)

  

The pattern was basically lent from an Iskra trainer and translated onto the swept wing MiG. The scheme is in so far noteworthy because the stabilizers carry the upper camo scheme on the undersides, too!?

 

I only did light shading and weathering, since all Polish Navy service aircraft I found had a arther clean and pristine look. A light black ink wash helped to emphasize the many fine raised panel lines, as well as some final overall dry painting with light grey.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in the notorious “Russian Cockpit Blue-Green” (Modelmaster), dashboard and are behind the seat were painted medium grey (FS 36231). The landing gear wells were kept in Aluminum (Humbrol 56), while the struts received a lighter acrylic Aluminum from Revell.

The wheel discs were painted bright green (Humbrol 131), but with the other shocking colors around that does not stand out at all…! The engine nozzles were treated with Modelmaster Metallizer, including Steel, Gun Metal and Titanium, plus some grinded graphite which adds an extra metallic shine.

 

The national “checkerboard” markings were puzzled together from various old decal sheets; the red tactical code was made with single digit decals (from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet); the squadron marking on the fin is fictional, the bird scaring eyes are a strange but als typical addition and I added some few stencils.

 

Finally, all was sealed under a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Revell).

  

In the end, not a simple whif with only little conversion surgery. But the paint scheme is rather original, if not psychedelic – this MiG looks as if a six-year-old had painted it, but it’s pretty true to reality and I can imagine that it is even very effective in an environment like the Baltic Sea.

+++ 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 AH-1 Cobra was developed in the mid-1960s as an interim gunship for the U.S. Army for use during the Vietnam War. The Cobra shared the proven transmission, rotor system, and the T53 turboshaft engine of the UH-1 "Huey". By June 1967, the first AH-1G HueyCobras had been delivered. Bell built 1,116 AH-1Gs for the U.S. Army between 1967 and 1973, and the Cobras chalked up over a million operational hours in Vietnam.

The U.S. Marine Corps was very interested in the AH-1G Cobra, too, but it preferred a twin-engine version for improved safety in over-water operations, and also wanted a more potent turret-mounted weapon. At first, the Department of Defense had balked at providing the Marines with a twin-engine version of the Cobra, in the belief that commonality with Army AH-1Gs outweighed the advantages of a different engine fit. However, the Marines won out and awarded Bell a contract for 49 twin-engine AH-1J SeaCobras in May 1968. As an interim measure the U.S. Army passed on thirty-eight AH-1Gs to the Marines in 1969. The AH-1J also received a more powerful gun turret with a three-barrel 20 mm XM197 cannon based on the six-barrel M61 Vulcan cannon.

 

During the 1990s, the US forces gradually phased out its Cobra fleet. The withdrawn AH-1s were typically offered to other potential operators, usually NATO allies. Some were also given to the USDA's Forest Service for fire surveillance, and a handful AH-1s went into private hands, including the NASA. Among these airframes were some USMC AH-1Js, which had in part been mothballed in the Mojave Desert since their replacement through more powerful and modern AH-1 variants and the AH-64.

About twenty airframes were, after having been de-militarized, bought by the Kaman Corporation in 2003, in a bold move to quickly respond to more than 20 inquiries for the company’s K-1200 ‘K-Max’ crane synchropter since the type’s end of production in 2001 from firefighting, logging and industry transport requirements. While not such a dedicated medium lift helicopter as the K-1200, which had from the outset been optimized for external cargo load operations, the twin-engine AH-1J promised to be a very effective alternative and a powerful basis for a conversion into a crane helicopter.

 

The result of this conversion program was the Kaman K-1300, also known as the “K-Cobra” or “Crane Cobra”. While the basic airframe of the AH-1J was retained, extensive detail modifications were made. To reduce weight and compensate for the extensive hardware changes, the SeaCobra lost its armor, the chin turret, and the stub wings. Beyond that, many invisible changes were made; the internal structure between the engine mounts was beefed up with an additional cage structure and a cargo hook was installed under the fuselage in the helicopter’s center of lift.

 

To further optimize the K-Cobra’s performance, the dynamic components were modified and improved, too. While the engine remained the same, its oil cooler was enlarged and the original output limit to 1.500 shp was removed and the gearbox was strengthened to fully exploit the twin-engine’s available power of 1,800 shp (1,342 kW). The rotor system was also modified and optimized for the transport of underslung loads: the original UH-1 dual-blade rotors were replaced with new four-blade rotors. The new main rotor with rugged heavy-duty blades offered more lift at less rotor speed, and the blades’ lift sections were moved away from the hub so that downwash and turbulences directly under the helicopter’s CoG and man hook were reduced to keep the cargo load more stable. Due to the main rotor’s slightly bigger diameter the tail rotor was changed into a slightly smaller four-blade rotor, too. This new arrangement made the K-1300 more stable while hovering or during slow speed maneuvers and more responsive to steering input.

 

The Cobra’s crew of two was retained, but the cockpit was re-arranged and split into two compartments: the pilot retained the original rear position in the tandem cockpit under the original glazing, but the gunner’s station in front of him, together with the secondary dashboard, was omitted and replaced by a new, fully glazed cabin under the former gunner position. This cabin occupied the former gun station and its ammunition supply and contained a rearward-facing workstation for a second pilot with full controls. It was accessible via a separate door or a ladder from above, through a trap door in the former gunner’s station floor, where a simple foldable bench was available for a third person. This arrangement was chosen due to almost complete lack of oversight of the slung load from the normal cockpit position, despite a CCTV (closed circuit television) system with two cameras intended for observation of slung loads. The second pilot would control the helicopter during delicate load-handling maneuvers, while the primary pilot “above” would fly the helicopter during transfer flights, both sharing the workload.

 

To accommodate the cabin under the fuselage and improve ground handling, the AH-1J’s skids were replaced by a stalky, fixed four-wheel landing gear that considerably increased ground clearance (almost 7 feet), making the attachment of loads on the ground to the main ventral hook easier, as the K-1300 could be “rolled over” the cargo on the ground and did not have to hover above it to connect. However, an external ladder had to be added so that the pilot could reach his/her workstation almost 10 feet above the ground.

 

The bulky ventral cabin, the draggy landing gear and the new lift-optimized rotor system reduced the CraneCobra’s top speed by a third to just 124 mph (200 km/h), but the helicopter’s load-carrying capacity became 35% higher and the Cobra’s performance under “hot & high” conditions was markedly improved, too.

For transfer flights, a pair of external auxiliary tanks could be mounted to the lower fuselage flanks, which could also be replaced with cargo boxes of similar size and shape.

 

K-1300 buyers primarily came from the United States and Canada, but there were foreign operators, too. A major operator in Europe became Heliswiss, the oldest helicopter company in Switzerland. The company was founded as „Heliswiss Schweizerische Helikopter AG“, with headquarters in Berne-Belp on April 17, 1953, what also marked the beginning of commercial helicopter flying in Switzerland. During the following years Heliswiss expanded in Switzerland and formed a network with bases in Belp BE, Samedan GR, Domat Ems GR, Locarno TI, Erstfeld UR, Gampel VS, Gstaad BE and Gruyères FR. During the build-up of the rescue-company Schweizerische Rettungsflugwacht (REGA) as an independent network, Heliswiss carried out rescue missions on their behalf.

 

Heliswiss carried out operations all over the world, e. g. in Greenland, Suriname, North Africa and South America. The first helicopter was a Bell 47 G-1, registered as HB-XAG on September 23, 1953. From 1963 Heliswiss started to expand and began to operate with medium helicopters like the Agusta Bell 204B with a turbine power of 1050 HP and an external load of up to 1500 kg. From 1979 Heliswiss operated a Bell 214 (external load up to 2.8 t).

Since 1991 Heliswiss operated a Russian Kamov 32A12 (a civil crane version of the Ka-27 “Helix”), which was joined by two K-1300s in 2004. They were frequently used for construction of transmission towers for overhead power lines and pylons for railway catenary lines, for selective logging and also as fire bombers with underslung water bags, the latter managed by the German Helog company, operating out of Ainring and Küssnacht in Germany and Switzerland until 2008, when Helog changed its business focus into a helicopter flight training academy in Liberia with the support of Germany's Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

A second Kamov 32A12 joined the fleet in 2015, which replaced one of the K-1300s, and Heliswiss’ last K-1300 was retired in early 2022.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2, plus space for a passenger

Length: 54 ft 3 in (16,56 m) including rotors

44 ft 5 in (13.5 m) fuselage only

Main rotor diameter: 46 ft 2¾ in (14,11 m)

Main rotor area: 1,677.64 sq ft (156,37 m2)

Width (over landing gear): 12 ft 6 in (3.85 m)

Height: 17 ft 8¼ in (5,40 m)

Empty weight: 5,810 lb (2,635 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,500 lb (4,309 kg) without slung load

13,515 lb (6,145 kg) with slung load

 

Powerplant:

1× P&W Canada T400-CP-400 (PT6T-3 Twin-Pac) turboshaft engine, 1,800 shp (1,342 kW)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 124 mph (200 km/h, 110 kn)

Cruise speed: 105 mph (169 km/h, 91 kn)

Range: 270 mi (430 km, 230 nmi) with internal fuel only,

360 mi (570 km 310 nmi) with external auxiliary tanks

Service ceiling: 15,000 ft (4,600 m)

Hovering ceiling out of ground effect: 3,000 m (9,840 ft)

Rate of climb: 2,500 ft/min (13 m/s) at Sea Level with flat-rated torque

 

External load capacity (at ISA +15 °C (59.0 °F):

6,000 lb (2,722 kg) at sea level

5,663 lb (2,569 kg) at 5,000 ft (1,524 m)

5,163 lb (2,342 kg) at 10,000 ft (3,048 m)

5,013 lb (2,274 kg) at 12,100 ft (3,688 m)

4,313 lb (1,956 kg) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is/was the second contribution to the late 2022 “Logistics” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com, a welcome occasion and motivation to tackle a what-if project that had been on my list for a long while. This crane helicopter conversion of a HueyCobra was inspired by the Mil Mi-10K helicopter – I had built a 1:100 VEB Plasticart kit MANY years ago and still remembered the helicopter’s unique ventral cabin under the nose with a rearward-facing second pilot. I always thought that the AH-1 might be a good crane helicopter, too, esp. the USMC’s twin-engine variant. And why not combine everything in a fictional model?

 

With this plan the basis became a Fujimi 1:72 AH-1J and lots of donor parts to modify the basic hull into “something else”. Things started with the removal of the chin turret and part of the lower front hull to make space for the ventral glass cabin. The openings for the stub wings were faired over and a different stabilizer (taken from a Revell EC 135, including the end plates) was implanted. The attachment points for the skids were filled and a styrene tube was inserted into the rotor mast opening to later hold the new four-blade rotor. Another styrene tube with bigger diameter was inserted into the lower fuselage as a display holder adapter for later flight scene pictures. Lead beads filled the nose section to make sure the CraneCobra would stand well on its new legs, with the nose down. The cockpit was basically taken OOB, just the front seat and the respective gunner dashboard was omitted.

 

One of the big challenges of this build followed next: the ventral cabin. Over the course of several months, I was not able to find a suitable donor, so I was forced to scratch the cabin from acrylic and styrene sheet. Size benchmark became the gunner’s seat from the Cobra kit, with one of the OOB pilots seated. Cabin width was less dictated through the fuselage, the rest of the cabin’s design became a rather simple, boxy thing – not pretty, but I think a real-life retrofitted cabin would not look much different? Some PSR was done to hide the edges of the rather thick all-clear walls and create a 3D frame - a delicate task. Attaching the completed thing with the second pilot and a dashboard under the roof to the Cobra’s lower hull and making it look more or less natural without major accidents was also a tricky and lengthy affair, because I ignored the Cobra’s narrowing nose above the former chin turret.

 

With the cabin defining the ground helicopter’s clearance, it was time for the next donors: the landing gear from an Airfix 1:72 Kamow Ka-25, which had to be modified further to achieve a proper stance. The long main struts were fixed to the hull, their supporting struts had to be scratched, in this case from steel wire. The front wheels were directly attached to the ventral cabin (which might contain in real life a rigid steel cage that not only protects the second crew member but could also take the front wheels’ loads?). Looks pretty stalky!

Under the hull, a massive hook and a fairing for the oil cooler were added. A PE brass ladder was mounted on the right side of the hull under the pilot’s cockpit, while a rear-view mirror was mounted for the ventral pilot on the left side.

 

The rotor system was created in parallel, I wanted “something different” from the UH-1 dual-blade rotors. The main rotor hub was taken from a Mistercraft 1:72 Westland Lynx (AFAIK a re-boxed ZTS Plastyk kit), which included the arms up to the blades. The hub was put onto a metal axis, with a spacer to make it sit well in the new styrene tube adapter inside of the hull, and some donor parts from the Revell EC 135. Deeper, tailored blades were glued to the Lynx hub, actually leftover parts from the aforementioned wrecked VEB Plasticart 1:100 Mi-10, even though their length had to be halved (what makes you aware how large a Mi-6/10 is compared with an AH-1!). The tail rotor was taken wholesale from the Lynx and stuck to the Cobra’s tail with a steel pin.

  

Painting and markings:

Another pushing factor for this build was the fact that I had a 1:72 Begemot aftermarket decal sheet for the Kamow Ka-27/32 in The Stash™, which features, among many military helicopters, (the) two civil Heliswiss machines – a perfect match!

Using the Swiss Helix’ as design benchmark I adapted their red-over-white paint scheme to the slender AH-1 and eventually ended up with a simple livery with a white belly (acrylic white from the rattle can, after extensive masking of the clear parts with Maskol/latex milk) and a red (Humbrol 19) upper section, with decorative counter-colored cheatlines along the medium waterline. A black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen. The auxiliary tanks were painted white, too, but they were processed separately and mounted just before the final coat of varnish was applied. The PE ladder as well as the rotors were handled similarly.

 

The cockpit and rotor opening interior were painted in a very dark grey (tar black, Revell 06), while the interior of the air intakes was painted bright white (Revell 301). The rotor blades became light grey (Revell 75) with darker leading edges (Humbrol 140), dark grey (Humbrol 164) hubs and yellow tips.

 

For the “HELOG/Heliswiss” tagline the lower white section had to be raised to a medium position on the fuselage, so that they could be placed on the lower flanks under the cockpit. The white civil registration code could not be placed on the tail and ended up on the engine cowling, on red, but this does not look bad or wrong at all.

The cheatlines are also decals from the Ka-32 Begemot sheet, even though they had to be trimmed considerably to fit onto the Cobra’s fuselage – and unfortunately the turned out to be poorly printed and rather brittle, so that I had to improvise and correct the flaws with generic red and white decal lines from TL Modellbau. The white cross on the tail and most stencils came from the Begemot sheet, too. Black, engine soot-hiding areas on the Cobra’s tail were created with generic decal sheet material, too.

 

The rotor blades and the wheels received a black ink treatment to emphasize their details, but this was not done on the hull to avoid a dirty or worn look. After some final details like position lights the model was sealed with semi-matt acrylic varnish, while the rotors became matt.

  

A weird-looking what-if model, but somehow a crane-copter variant of the AH-1 looks quite natural – even more so in its attractive red-and-white civil livery. The stalky landing gear is odd, though, necessitated by the ventral cabin for the second pilot. I was skeptical, but scratching the latter was more successful than expected, and the cabin blend quite well into the AH-1 hull, despite its boxy shape.

 

+++ 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 McDonnell F-101 Voodoo was a supersonic jet fighter which primarily served the United States Air Force (USAF). Initially designed by McDonnell Aircraft as a long-range bomber escort (known as a penetration fighter) for the Strategic Air Command (SAC), the Voodoo was instead developed as a nuclear-armed fighter-bomber for the Tactical Air Command (TAC) and later evolved into an all-weather interceptor as well as into a reconnaissance platform.

 

The Voodoo's career as a fighter-bomber (F-101A and C) was relatively brief, but the reconnaissance fighter versions served for some time. Along with the US Air Force's Lockheed U-2 and US Navy's Vought RF-8 Crusaders, the RF-101 reconnaissance variant of the Voodoo was instrumental during the Cuban Missile Crisis and saw extensive service during the Vietnam War. Beyond original RF-101 single seaters, a number of former F-101A and Cs were, after the Vietnam era, converted into photo reconnaissance aircraft (as RF-101G and H) for the US Air National Guards.

 

Delays in the 1954 interceptor project (also known as WS-201A, which spawned to the troubled F-102 Delta Dagger) led to demands for an interim interceptor aircraft design, a role that was eventually won by the Voodoo’s B model. This new role required extensive modifications to add a large radar to the nose of the aircraft, a second crewmember to operate it, and a new weapons bay using a unique rotating door that kept its four AIM-4 Falcon missiles (two of them alternatively replaced by unguided AIR-2 Genie nuclear warhead rockets with 1.5 Kt warheads) semi-recessed under the airframe.

The F-101B was first deployed into service on 5 January 1959, and this interceptor variant was produced in greater numbers than the original F-101A and C fighter bombers, with a total of 479 being delivered by the end of production in 1961. Most of these were delivered to the Air Defense Command (ADC), the only foreign customer was Canada from 1961 onwards (as CF-101B), after the cancellation of the CF-105 Arrow program in February 1959. From 1963–66, USAF F-101Bs were upgraded under the Interceptor Improvement Program (IIP; also known as "Project Bold Journey") with a fire control system enhancement against hostile ECM and an infrared sighting and tracking (IRST) system in the nose in place of the Voodoo’s original hose-and drogue in-flight refueling probe.

 

The F-101B interceptor later became the basis of further Voodoo versions which were intended to improve the tactical reconnaissance equipment of the US Air National Guards. In the early 1970s, a batch of 22 former Canadian CF-101Bs were returned to the US Air Force and, together with some USAF Voodoos, converted into dedicated reconnaissance aircraft, similar to the former RF-101G/H conversion program for the single-seat F-101A/C fighter bombers.

 

These modified interceptors were the RF-101B and J variants. Both had their radar replaced with a set of three KS-87B cameras (one looking forward and two as a split vertical left/right unit) and a panoramic KA-56 camera, while the former missile bay carried different sensor and avionics packages.

The RF-101Bs were exclusively built from returned Canadian Voodoos. Beyond the photo camera equipment, they featured upgraded navigational equipment in the former weapon bay and a set of two AXQ-2 TV cameras, an innovative technology of the era. A TV viewfinder was fitted to the cockpit and the system was operated effectively from altitudes of 250 ft at 600 knots.

The other re-built reconnaissance version, the RF-101J, was created from twelve former USAF F-101Bs, all of them from the final production year 1961 and with relatively few flying hours. Beyond the KS-87B/KA-56 camera set in the nose, the RF-101J featured a Goodyear AN/APQ-102 SLAR (Side-looking airborne radar) that occupied most of the interceptor’s former rotating internal weapon bay, which also carried a fairing for a heat exchanger. The radar’s conformal antenna array was placed on either side of the lower nose aft of the cameras and allowed to record radar maps from view to each side of the aircraft and pinpoint moving targets like trucks in a swath channel approximately 10 nautical miles (11.5 miles/18 km) wide. To identify potential targets along the flight path for the SLAR and to classify them, the RF-101J furthermore received an AN/AAS-18 Infrared Detecting Set (IRDS). It replaced the F-101B’s IRST in front of the cockpit and was outwardly the most obvious distinguishing detail from the RF-1010B, which lacked this hump in front of the windscreen. The IRDS’ range was almost six miles (9.5 km) and covered the hemisphere in front of the aircraft. With the help of this cryogenically-cooled device the crewman in the rear cockpit could identify through a monitor small heat signatures like hot engines, firing weapons or campfires, even in rough terrain and hidden under trees.

 

Both new Voodoo recce versions were unarmed and received AN/APR-36 radar homing and warning sensors to nose and tail. They also had an in-flight refueling receptacle re-fitted, even though this was now only compatible with the USAF’s high-speed refueling boom system and was therefore placed in a dorsal position behind the cockpit. Furthermore, both versions received a pair of unplumbed underwing pylons for light loads, e. g. for AN/ALQ-101,-119 or -184 ECM pods, photoflash ejectors for night photography or SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys and chaff dispenser pods.

 

The RF-101Bs were delivered in 1971 and allocated to the 192d Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron of the Nevada Air National Guard, where they served only through 1975 because their advanced TV camera system turned out to be costly to operate and prone to failures. Their operational value was very limited and most RF-101Bs were therefore rather used as proficiency trainers than for recce missions. As a consequence, they were already phased out from January 1975 on.

The RF-101Js entered service in 1972 and were allocated to the 147th Reconnaissance Wing of the Texas Air National Guard. Unlike the RF-101Bs’ TV cameras, the AN/APQ-102 SLAR turned out to be reliable and more effective. These machines were so valuable that they even underwent some upgrades: By 1977 the front-view camera under the nose had been replaced with an AN/ASQ-145 Low Light Level TV (LLLTV) camera, sensitive to wavelengths above the visible (0.4 to 0.7 micrometer) wavelengths and ranging into the short-wave Infrared (usually to about 1.0 to 1.1 micrometer). The AN/ASQ-145 complemented the IRDS with visual input and was able to amplify the existing light 60,000 times to produce television images as clearly as if it were noon. In 1980, the RF-101Js were furthermore enabled to carry a centerline pod for the gigantic HIAC-1 LOROP (Long Range Oblique Photography) camera, capable of taking high-resolution images of objects 100 miles (160 km) away.

 

USAF F-101B interceptors were, as more modern and effective interceptors became available (esp. the F-4 Phantom II), handed off to the Air National Guard, where they served in the fighter role until 1982. Canadian CF-101B interceptors remained in service until 1984 and were replaced by the CF-18 Hornet. The last operational Canadian Voodoo, a single EF-101B (nicknamed the “Electric Voodoo”, a CF-101B outfitted with the jamming system of the EB-57E Canberra and painted all-black) was returned to the United States on 7 April 1987. However, the RF-101Js served with the Texas ANG until 1988, effectively being the last operational Voodoos in the world. They were replaced with RF-4Cs.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: Two

Length: 67 ft 5 in (20.55 m)

Wingspan: 39 ft 8 in (12.09 m)

Height: 18 ft 0 in (5.49 m)

Wing area: 368 ft² (34.20 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 65A007 mod root, 65A006 mod tip

Empty weight: 28,495 lb (12,925 kg)

Loaded weight: 45,665 lb (20,715 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 52,400 lb (23,770 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Pratt & Whitney J57-P-55 afterburning turbojets

with 11,990 lbf (53.3 kN) dry thrust and 16,900 lbf (75.2 kN) thrust with afterburner each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.72, 1,134 mph (1,825 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,500 m)

Range: 1,520 mi (2,450 km)

Service ceiling: 54,800 ft (17,800 m)

Rate of climb: 36,500 ft/min (185 m/s)

Wing loading: 124 lb/ft² (607 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.74

 

Armament:

None, but two 450 US gal (370 imp gal; 1,700 l) drop-tanks were frequently carried on ventral

hardpoints; alternatively, a central hardpoint could take single, large loads like the HIAC-1 LOROP

camera pod.

A pair of retrofitted underwing hardpoints could carry light loads like ECM jammer pods,

flare/chaff dispensers or photoflash ejectors

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is another project that I had on my agenda for a long while. It originally started with pictures of an RF-101H gate guard in Louisville at Standiford Field International from around 1987-1991:

 

imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/6/2/9/1351926.jpg?...

 

www.aerialvisuals.ca/Airframe/Gallery/0/41/0000041339.jpg

 

This preserved machine wore a rather unusual (for a Voodoo) ‘Hill’ low-viz scheme with toned-down markings, quite similar to the late USAF F-4 Phantom IIs of the early Eighties. The big aircraft looked quite good in this simple livery, and I kept the idea of a Hill scheme Voodoo in the back of my mind for some years until I recently had the opportunity to buy a cheap Matchbox Voodoo w/o box and decals. With its optional (and unique) RF-101B parts I decided to take the Hill Voodoo idea to the hardware stage and create another submission to the “Reconnaissance and Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com around July 2021: an ANG recce conversion of a former two-seat interceptor, using the RF-101B as benchmark but with a different suite of sensors.

 

However, the Matchbox Voodoo kit is rather mediocre, and in a rather ambitious mood I decided to “upgrade” the project with a Revell F-101B as the model’s basis. This kit is from 1991 and a MUCH better and finely detailed model than the rather simple Matchbox kit from the early Eighties. In fact, the Revell F-101B is actually a scaled-down version of Monogram’s 1:48 F-101B model kit from 1985, with many delicate details. But while this downscaling practice has produced some very nice 1:72 models like the F-105D or the F-4D, the scaling effect caused IMHO in this case a couple of problems. Revell's assembly instructions for the 1:72 kit are not good, either. While the step-by-step documentation is basically good, some sketches are so cluttered that you cannot tell where parts in the cockpit or on the landing gear are actually intended to be placed and how. This is made worse by the fact that there are no suitable markings on the parts – you are left to guessing.

Worse, there is a massive construction error: the way the wings section is to be assembled and mounted to the hull is impossible! The upper wing halves have locator pins for the fuselage, but they are supposed to be glued to the lower wing half (which also encompasses the aircraft's belly) and the mounted to the hull. The locator pins make this impossible, unless you bend the lower wing section to a point where it might warp or break, or you just cut the pins off - and live with some instability. Technically the upper wing halves have to be mounted to the fuselage before you glue the lower wing section to them, but I am not certain if this would work well because you also have to assemble the air intakes at the same time “from behind”, which is only feasible when the wings have already been completed but still left away from the fuselage. It’s a nonsense construction! I cannot remember when I came across a kit the last time with such an inherent design flaw?

 

Except for the transplanted RF-101B nose section, which did not fit well because the Matchbox Voodoo apparently has a more slender nose, the Revell kit was built mostly OOB. However, this is already a challenge in itself because of the kit’s inherent flaws (see above), its complex construction and an unorthodox assembly sequence, due to many separate internal modules including the cockpit tub, a separate (fully detailed) front landing gear well, a rotating weapon bay, air intakes with complete ducts, and the wing section. A fiddly affair.

 

Only a few further changes beyond the characteristic camera fairing under the radome were made. The rotating weapon bay was faired-over with the original weapon pallet, just fixing it into place and using putty to blend it into the belly. The small underwing pylons (an upgrade that actually happened to some late Voodoos) were taken from a vintage Revell F-16. The SLAR antenna fairings along the cockpit flanks were created with 0.5mm styrene sheet and some PSR. They are a little too obvious/protruding, but for a retrofitted solution I find the result acceptable. The drop tanks came from the Revell kit, the underwing ordnance consists of an ALQ-119 ECM pod from a Hasegawa aftermarket set and a SUU-42 dispenser, scratched from a Starfighter ventral drop tank, bomb fins and the back of a Soviet unguided missile launcher.

  

Painting and markings:

Very simple and basic. While I originally wanted to adopt the simple two-tone ‘Hill’ scheme from the gate guard for my fictional Voodoo, I eventually settled for the very similar but slightly more sophisticated ‘Egypt One’ scheme that was introduced with the first F-16s – it just works better on the F-101’s surfaces. This scheme uses three grey tones: FS 36118 (Gunship Gray, ModelMaster 1723) for the upper wing surfaces, the “saddle” on the fuselage and the canopy area with an anti-glare panel, FS 36270 (Medium Grey, Humbrol 126) on the fin and the fuselage area in front of the wing roots, and FS 36375 (Light Ghost Grey, Humbrol 127) for all lower surfaces, all blended into each other with straight but slightly blurred edges (created with a soft, flat brush). The radome and the conformal antennae on the flanks became Revell 47 for a consistent grey-in-grey look, but with a slightly different shade. The model received an overall black ink washing and some post panel shading, so that the large grey areas would not look too uniform.

 

As an updated USAF aircraft I changed the color of the landing gear wells’ interior from green zinc chromate primer to more modern, uniform white, even though the red inside of the covers was retained. The interior of the flaps (a nice OOB option of Revell’s kit) and the air brakes became bright red, too.

The cockpit retained its standard medium grey (Humbrol 140, Dark Gull Grey) interior and I used the instrument decals from the kit – even though these did not fit well onto the 3D dashboards and side consoles. WTF? Decal softener came to the rescue. The exhaust area was painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and Humbrol’s Steel Metallizer (27003), later treated with graphite for a dirty, metallic shine.

 

Markings/decals primarily come from a 1:72 Hi-Decal F-4D sheet that contains (among others) several Texas ANG Phantoms from the mid-Eighties. Some stencils were taken over from the original Voodoo sheet, the yellow formation lights had to be procured from a Hasegawa F-4E/J sheet (the Matchbox sheet was lost and the Revell sheet lacks them completely!). The characteristic deep yellow canopy sealant stripes came from a CF-101 sheet from Winter Valley Decals (today part of Canuck Models as CAD 72008). I was lucky to have them left over from another what-if build MANY moons ago, my fictional CF-151 kitbashing.

 

Everything went on smoothly, but the walkway markings above the air intakes became a problem. I initially used those from the Revell sheet, which are only the outlines so that the camouflage would still be visible. But the decal film, which is an open square, turned out to be so thin that it wrinkled on the curved surface whatever I tried, and what looked like a crisp black outline on the white decal paper turned out to be a translucent dark blue with blurry edges on the kit. I scrapped them while still wet… Enter plan B: Next came the walkway markings from the aforementioned Winter Valley sheet, which were MUCH better, sharper and opaque, but they included the grey walking areas. While the tone looked O.K. on the sheet it turned out to be much too light for the all-grey Voodoo, standing out and totally ruining the low-viz look. With a bleeding heart I eventually ripped them off of the model with the help of adhesive tape, what left light grey residues. Instead of messing even more with the model I finally decided to embrace this accident and manually added a new black frame to the walkway areas with generic 2mm decal stripe material from TL Modellbau The area now looks rather worn, as if the camouflage had peeled off and light grey primer shows through. An unintentional result, but it looks quite “natural”.

 

The “Rhino Express” nose art was created with Corel Draw and produced with a simple inkjet printer on clear decal sheet. It was inspired by the “toenail” decoration on the main landing gear covers, a subtle detail I saw IIRC on a late CF-101B and painted onto the model by hand. With its all-grey livery, the rhino theme appeared so appropriate, and the tag on the nose appeared like a natural addition. It’s all not obvious but adds a personal touch to the aircraft.

 

Finally, after some more exhaust stains had been added to various air outlets around the hull, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish, position lights were added with clear paint and the camera windows, which had been created with black decal material, received glossy covers. The IRST sensor was painted with translucent black over a gold base.

  

Well, while the all-grey USAF livery in itself is quite dull and boring, but I must say that it suits the huge and slender Voodoo well. It emphasizes the aircraft's sleek lines and the Texas ANG fin flash as a colorful counterpoint, as well as the many red interior sections that only show from certain angles, nicely break the adapted low-viz Egypt One livery up. The whole thing looks surprisingly convincing, and the subtle rhino markings add a certain tongue-in-cheek touch.

I've written more about the two here.

 

Camera: Sony A7r

Lens: Nikkor 85/2,8D Mikro ED (1st gen)

 

Strobist: Pro-B heads x2; 1 in strip light, camera left; the other to the side of the AK240. Trigger: SB700 parallel to the Leica M and through a semi-translucent styrene board.

This time the GF 63mm F/2,8 gets its camera.

 

ohm-image.net/opinion/photophile/fujifilm-gfx-50s-versati...

 

Strobist:

Three Profoto D1 heads, at 6/10 power either side of the object behind single styrene boards, and one above, gridded and behind a styrene board. Power 7/10.

  

Camera: Leica SL

Focusing system: Novoflex BALPRO T/S

Lens: Sinaron Digital 80mm F/4

Shell Oil Company

59’5” 31,850gal Styrene Tank Car (DOT Class 111A100W1)

SCMX 6424

Blt. Trinity Rail (TRN), 02/14 (SCMX 6000-6519)

CN MacMillan Yard, Vaughan, Ontario, Canada

July 15th, 2018

 

1600 x 1050

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armoured divisions, had become increasingly urgent for the German Armed Forces, as from 1943 on the German Air Force was less and less able to protect itself against enemy fighter bombers.

Therefore, a multitude of improvised and specially designed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns were built, many based on the Panzer IV chassis. This development started with the Flakpanzer IV “Möbelwagen”, which was only a Kampfpanzer IV with the turret removed and a 20mm Flakvierling installed instead, together with foldable side walls that offered only poor protection for the gun crew. The lineage then progressed through the Wirbelwind and Ostwind models, which had their weapons and the crew protected in fully rotating turrets, but these were still open at the top. This flaw was to be eliminated in the Kugelblitz, the final development of the Flakpanzer IV.

 

The Kugelblitz used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement. The MK 103 was a powerful aircraft weapon that had formerly been fitted in single mounts to such planes as the Henschel Hs 129 or Bf 1110 in a ventral gun pod against tanks, and it was also fitted to the twin-engine Dornier Do 335 heavy fighter and other interceptors against Allied bombers. When used by the army, it received the designation “3 cm Flak 38”. It had a weight of only 141 kg (311 lb) and a length of 235 cm (93 in) with muzzle brake. Barrel length was 134 cm (53 in), resulting in caliber L/44.7 (44.7 caliber). The weapon’s muzzle velocity was around 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s), allowing an armour penetration for APCR 42–52 mm (1.7–2.0 in)/60°/300 m (980 ft) or 75–95 mm (3.0–3.7 in)/ 90°/ 300 m (980 ft), with an effective maximum firing range of around 5.700 m (18.670 ft). The MK 103 was gas-operated, fully automatic and belt-fed, an innovative feature at that time for AA guns.

In the fully enclosed Kugelblitz turret the weapons could be fired singly or simultaneously, and their theoretical rate of fire was 450 rounds a minute, even though 250 rpm in short bursts was more practical. The total ammunition load for both weapons was 1,200 rounds and the discharged cases fell into canvas bags placed under the guns. The MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, so that fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

The Kugelblitz turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body was hanging in a ring mount, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s top and kept the profile very low. The turret offered full overhead protection, 360° traverse and space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition – even though it was very cramped. Elevation of the weapons (as well as of the crew sitting inside of the turret!) was from -5° to +80°, turning speed was 60°/sec.

The commander/gunner, who had a small observation cupola on top of the turret, was positioned in the middle, behind the main guns. The two gunner assistants were placed on the left and right side in front of him, in a slightly lower position. The assistant situated left of the guns was responsible for the turret’s movements, the one on the right side was responsible for loading the guns, and the spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors..

 

However, the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz SPAAG was ill-fated: A production rate of 30 per month by December 1944 was planned, but never achieved, because tank production had become seriously hampered and production of the Panzer IV was about to be terminated in favor of the new E-series tank family. Therefore, almost all Flakpanzer IV with the Kugelblitz turret were conversions of existing hulls, mostly coming from repair shops.

In parallel, work was under way to adapt the Kugelblitz turret to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer hull, too, which was still in production in the former Czechoslovakian Skoda works, and to the new, light E-10 and E-25 tank chassis. Due to this transitional and slightly chaotic situation, production numbers of the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz remained limited - in early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production already ceased in May.

 

By that time, the Kugelblitz turret had been successfully adapted to the Hetzer chassis, even though this had called for major adaptations of the upper hull due to the relatively wide turret ring, which originally came from the Tiger I. The conversion worked and the unique turret could be successfully shoehorned into the Hetzer basis, making it a very compact and relatively light vehicle – it was 5 tons lighter than the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz” SPAAG.

In order to carry the turret, the welded upper hull had to be widened and the glacis plate was reinforced with an extra plate, which also covered the Hetzer’s original opening for its 75 mm gun. The resulting 60 mm (2.36 in) thick front plate was inclined 60 degrees from the vertical, and therefore offered around 120 mm (4.72 in) of effective protection – much better than the Panzer IV’s almost vertical 50 mm (or 80 mm with additional armor on late versions). In this form, the vehicle could withstand direct frontal hits from most medium Allied tanks. The side walls were rather thin, though, only 20 mm, and they became more vertical to make room for the turret mount. The engine cover behind the turret had to be modified, too. Due to the massive changes, the vehicle received a new, separate designation, “Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sd.Kfz.) 170” and it was officially called “Leichter Flakpanzer 38(t) 3 cm“.

 

However, there were many drawbacks. The interior was cramped: the self-contained Kugelblitz turret itself already lacked internal space, but the driver – the only crew member in the hull – also had little space in front of the turret’s mount and he could only access his working place through an opening in the turret at the commander’s feet when it was in a level forward position. There was no dedicated hatch for the driver, only an emergency escape scuttle in the floor.

Another issue was the field of view from inside for everyone. As already mentioned, the driver did not have a hatch that could be used for a good view when not driving under fire. He also only had a single panoramic sight, so that he could just see what was going on directly in front of him. There were no side view openings, and especially the right side of the vehicle was literally blind. The crew in the turret also could only rely on forward-facing sights, just the commander had a rotating periscope. But due to its position, the areas directly along the vehicle’s flanks and its rear remained wide blind areas that made it very vulnerable to infantry attacks. This flaw was even worsened by the fact that there were no additional light weapons available (or even deployable from the inside) for close range defense – the Panzer IV-based SPAAGs carried a hull-mounted machine gun. And the crew had, due to the open weapon stations a much better field of view or could directly use their own light weapons.

 

With the turret’s additional weight (the Sd.Kfz. 170 was 3 tons heavier than the Hetzer), and despite a slightly uprated petrol engine, the tank was rather underpowered, especially off road. Another negative side effect of the turret was a considerably raised center of gravity. The original Hetzer was a nimble vehicle with good handling, but the Sd.Kfz. 170 was hard to control, tended to build up and roll even on the road and its off-road capabilities were markedly hampered by the concentration of weight so high above the ground, making it prone to tip over to the side when the driver did not take care of terrain slope angles. This wobbly handling, as well as the turret’s shape, gave the vehicle the unofficial nickname “Kugelhetzer”.

 

Nevertheless, all these flaws were accepted, since the Sd.Kfz. 170. was, like its Panzer IV-based predecessors, urgently needed and only regarded as an interim solution until a light E-Series chassis had been adapted to the turret. It was also surmised that the vehicle would not operate independently and rather escort other troops, so that close-range protection was in most cases ensured. Under this premise, about 100 Sd.Kfz. 170s were built until early 1946, when production of the Hetzer and its components were stopped. Operationally, the vehicle was not popular (esp. among drivers), but it was quite successful, not only against aircraft (esp. when used in conjunction with the new mobile radar-based fire direction centers), but also against lightly armored ground targets.

Plans to stretch the hull for more internal space, better field performance and crew comfort as well as replacing the engine with a bigger and more powerful 8 cylinder Tatra engine were never executed, since all resources were allocated to the new E-series tanks.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Four (commander/gunner, 2 assistants incl. radio operator, driver)

Weight: 18 tons (22.000 lb)

Length: 4.61 m (15 ft 1 in)

Width: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Height: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Ground clearance: 40 cm (15 ¾ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 320 litres (85 US gal)

 

Armor:

10 – 60 mm (0.39 – 2.36 in)

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 42 km/h (26 mph)

Sustained road speed: 36 km/h (22.3 mph)

Off-road speed: 26 km/h (16 mph)

Operational range: 177 km (110 mi)

Power/weight: 10 PS/t

 

Engine:

Praga 6-cylinder 7.8 liter petrol engine, delivering 180 PS (178 hp, 130 kW) at 2,800 rpm

 

Transmission:

Praga-Wilson Typ CV with 5 forwards and 1 reverse gears

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

The so-called “Kugelhetzer” was a real German project in late WWII, but it was rather a vague idea, it never it made to the hardware stage. Even from its predecessor, the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz”, only five tanks were actually built. However, I found the idea interesting, since the combination of existing elements would lead to a very compact SPAAG. And since I had a spare Kugelblitz turret from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” SF mecha kits at hand, I decided to build a model of this conceptual tank.

 

The chassis is a Bergepanzer 38(t), a.k.a. “Bergehetzer”, from UM Models, an unarmed recovery tank based on the Hetzer hull with an open top. For my conversion plan it offered the benefit of a blank glacis plate and lots of spare parts for future builds. However, upon inspection of the parts-not-intended-to-be-mated I became slightly disillusioned: while the Hetzer’s upper original hull offers enough room for the ball turret itself to be inserted into the roof, it could NEVER take the turret bearing and the armored collar ring around it. They already are hard to mount on a Panzer IV hull, but the Hetzer is an even smaller vehicle, despite its casemate layout. I was about to shelf the project again, but then decided to modify and adapt the upper hull to the turret. In real life the engineers would have taken a similar route.

 

I started to scratch the superstructure from 0.5mm styrene sheet, and work started with the roof that had to be wide enough to carry the turret ring. This was glued into place on top of the hull, and from this benchmark the rest of the “armor plates” was added – starting with the engine bay cover, then adding side walls and finally the more complex corner sections, which actually consist of two triangular plates, but only one of them was actually fitted. The leftover openings were filled with acrylic putty, also in order to fill and stabilize the void between the original hull and the added plates. Later, the necessary space for the ball turret was carved away from the original hull, so that the Kugelblitz turret could be inserted in its new opening. Sounds complicated, but the construction was less complicated than expected, and it looked even better!

 

Once mated with the lower chassis, some details had to be added to the blank surfaces – e. g. racks with spare barrels for the guns and some tools and stowage boxes. These were taken from the Bergehetzer kit and partly modified to match the different hull.

What really became a challenge was the assembly of the tracks upon the model’s completion. Unfortunately, they consist of single elements and even links that have to be glued to the wheels, and since they were not crisply molded (just like the sprocket drive wheels) their installation was a rather tedious affair.

  

Painting and markings:

This is another variation of the “Hinterhalt” concept, using the three basic tones of Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). In this case – as an autumn scheme with fading light and more red and brown leaves - I used a late-war Panther as reference and gave the vehicle a rather dark basic livery consisting of green and the brown, and on top of that I added counter-colored (green on brown and brown on green) mottles, plus contrast mottles in Dunkelgelb. The tones I used were Humbrol 83, 86 and 113 - the latter is not the standard tone for the Hinterhalt scheme (180 would be appropriate), but it comes close to the typical German red Oxidrot (RAL 3009) primer, which was not only used on bare tank hulls during production but was also integrated into camouflage schemes, frequently stretched and lightened through additives. Effectively the livery is very standard, and since this Kugelhetzer model would depict a standard production vehicle and not a conversion, I extended the camouflage to the turret, too, for a consistent look.

The wheels remained in a single color (just the basic red brown and green), since camouflage was prohibited to be extended onto moving parts of the vehicle: a swirling pattern would have been very obvious and eye-catching when the vehicle was on the move.

 

A washing with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint followed. The decals – mostly taken from the small OOB sheet – came next, and I settled upon simplified national markings and just white outlines for the tactical code, due to the rather murky camouflage underneath.

The model’s main components were sealed with matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can before their final assembly, and I did some dry-brushing with light grey to emphasize details and edges. Finally, a coat of pigment dust was applied to the model’s lower areas and used to hide some flaws along the fiddly tracks.

  

A conclusive outcome, and a more complex build than obvious at first sight. The re-built upper hull was easier to realize than expected, the true horror came with the assembly of the tracks which consist of tiny, not really crisply molded elements. Why the return track section has to be constructed of five(!) segments - even though it's a straight line - is beyond my comprehension, too.

However, the outcome looks quite good, even though the use of the original Hetzer hull would have created several problems, if the original Kugelblitz turret had had to be integrated. Esp. the lack of space for the driver (and a suitable access hatch!) make this design idea rather unpractical, so that a stretched hull (AFAIK there’s a model of such a modified vehicle available) would have made sense.

+++ 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:

During the interwar period, the U.S. Navy Command had placed considerable emphasis upon the role of armed aerial reconnaissance aircraft. To meet this interest, during 1931, the young Great Lakes Aircraft Company (founded in 1929 in Cleveland, Ohio) decided to embark on the development of a new naval combat aircraft to meet this role. The new aircraft, which was designated as the SBG, was a relatively modern all-metal design, even though some conservative traits like a fixed landing gear were kept.

 

The SBG was a low-wing cantilever monoplane, featuring all-metal, metal-covered construction. The crew of three consisted of a pilot, a bombardier and a rear gunner. The bombardier's combat station was situated in a gondola underneath the hull. The pilot was positioned well forward in the fuselage with an excellent field of view, within a fully enclosed, air-conditioned and heated cockpit, while the observer was seated directly behind him and could descend into the ventral gondola during applicable parts of a given mission, where he had an unobstructed field of view underneath the aircraft. A lookout station at the gondola’s front end could be outfitted with a bombsight.

 

The fixed undercarriage was covered with spats and comprised a pair of cantilever struts and single tail wheel, all of which were outfitted with pneumatic shock absorbers. One of the more unusual features of the SBG was the design of its three-piece low-mounted wing: In order to produce a wing that was both light and strong, the wing construction combined a revolutionary heavy-gauge corrugated duralumin center box and a multi-cellular trailing edge, along with a partially stressed exterior skin composed of duralumin. It was one of the earliest implementations of a metal sandwich structure in the field of aviation. Furthermore, the wings could, for storage on carriers, be manually folded back, just outside of the landing gear.

 

The fuselage of the SBG had an oval-section structure, composed of a mixture of duralumin frames and stringers, which were strengthened via several struts on the middle section. The fuselage exterior was covered with smooth duralumin sheet, which was internally reinforced in some areas by corrugated sheeting. The rear fuselage featured a semi-monocoque structure. A cantilever structure composed of ribs and spars was used for the tail unit; fin and tail plane were covered by duralumin sheeting, while the rudder and elevators had finely corrugated exterior surfaces.

 

The SBG’s original powerplant was a Pratt & Whitney R-1830-64 Twin Wasp radial engine of 850 hp (630 kW). The aircraft's offensive payload consisted of bombs. These were carried externally underneath the fuselage and the wings, using racks; the maximum load was a single 1,935 lb. (878 kg) Bliss-Leavitt Mark 13 aerial torpedo or 1,500 lb. (700 kg) of bombs, including a single 1,000 lb. (450 kg) bomb under the fuselage and up to 200 lb. under the outer wings.

The SBG was also armed with several machine guns, including rearward-facing defensive ventral and dorsal positions, each outfitted with a manual .30 in (7.62 mm) Browning machine gun. Another fixed machine gun fired, synchronized with the engine, forward through the propeller arc.

 

The first XSBG-1 prototype, which was christened “Prion” by Great Lakes, was ready in early 1934 and made its maiden flight on 2nd of April. While the aircraft handled well, esp. at low speed, thanks to generously dimensioned flaps, it soon became clear that it was seriously underpowered. Therefore, Great Lakes tried to incorporate a more powerful engine. The choice fell on the new Pratt & Whitney R-2180-A Twin Hornet. However, the bigger and heavier engine called for considerable changes to the engine mount and the cowling. The R-2180 also precluded the fixed machine gun, so it was, together with the synchronization gearbox, deleted. Instead, a pair of .30 in machine guns were added to the spats, which were deepened in order to take the weapons and the magazines.

 

Furthermore, the heavier engine shifted the aircraft’s center of gravity forward, so that the tail section had to be lengthened by roughly 1’ and the tail surfaces were enlarged, too. Various other alterations were made to the wings, including the adoption of more effective slotted ailerons, improved flaps and center-section slots. The latter feature served to smooth the airflow over the tail when flown at high angles of incidence. However, despite these changes, the SBG’s good handling did not suffer, and the modified XSBG-2 took to the air for the first time in late 1935, with a much better performance.

 

Satisfied with the changes, the US Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) placed an initial order for 54 SBG-2s in 1936 with the aircraft entering service during 1938, serving on USS Yorktown and Enterprise. However, faults were discovered with the Mark XIII torpedo at this point. Many were seen to hit the target yet failed to explode; there was also a tendency to run deeper than the set depth. It took over a year for the defects to be corrected. Another problem of the SBG when carrying the torpedo was the aimer’s position, which was located directly behind the weapon and obstructed the bomb aimer’s field of view forward. When deploying bombs from higher altitudes, this was not a problem at all, but as a consequence the SBG rarely carried torpedoes. Therefore, a second order of 48 aircraft (designated SBG-3) were pure bombers. These lacked any torpedo equipment, but they received a ventral displacement yoke that allowed to deploy bombs in a shallow dive and release them outside of the propeller arc. Furthermore, the bomb aimer/observer station received a more generous glazing, improving the field of view and offering the prone crewman in this position more space and comfort. Another modification was the reinforcement of the underwing hardpoints, so that these could now carry stores of up to 325 lb each or, alternatively, drop tanks. While the total payload was not changed, the SBG-3 could carry and deploy up to three depth charges against submarines, and the extended range was a welcome asset for reconnaissance missions.

 

In prewar use, SBG units were engaged in training and other operational activities and were gradually approaching the end of their useful service life with at least one aircraft being converted to target tug duty. By 1940, the US Navy was aware that the SBG had become outclassed by the fighters and bombers of other nations and a replacement was in the works, but it was not yet in service when the US entered World War II. By then, attrition had reduced their numbers to just over 60 aircraft, and with the arrival of the Curtiss SB2C “Helldiver” in December 1942, the obsolete SBGs were retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 3

Length: 31 ft 9 in (9.682 m)

Wingspan: 45 ft 9 in (13.95 m)

Height: 10 ft 10 in (3.3 m)

Wing area: 288 sq ft (26.8 m²)

Empty weight: 4,251 lb. (1,928 kg)

Gross weight: 6,378 - 6,918 lb. (2,893 - 3,138 kg) for reconnaissance missions

7,705 - 7,773 lb (3,495 - 3,526 kg) for bombing missions

Fuel capacity: 200 US gal (740 l; 160 imp gal) in six wing tanks plus

7.9 US gal (30 l; 6.6 imp gal) in a gravity feed collector tank in the fuselage

18 US gal (70 l; 15 imp gal) of engine oil was also carried in a forward fuselage tank

 

Powerplant:

1 × Pratt & Whitney R-2180-A Twin Hornet 14 cylinder radial engine with 1,200 hp (865 kW),

driving a 3-bladed Hamilton-Standard Hydromatic, 11 ft 3 in (3.43 m) diameter constant-speed

fully-feathering propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 245 mph (395 km/h, 213 kn) at 3,650 m (11,980 ft)

210 mph (338 km/h, 183 kn) at sea level

Stall speed: 110 km/h (68 mph, 59 kn)

Range: 1,260 km (780 mi, 680 nmi)

Service ceiling: 7,300 m (24,000 ft)

Time to altitude: 2,000 m (6,600 ft) in 4 minutes

4,000 m (13,000 ft) in 11 minutes 10 seconds

Wing loading: 116 kg/m² (24 lb/sq ft) to 130 kg/m2 (27 lb/sq ft)

Power/mass: 6.3–6.8 kg/kW (10.4–11.2 lb/hp)

 

Armament:

2x fixed forward firing 0.30 “ (7.62 mm) Browning machine guns in the spats, firing forward,

plus 2x flexibly mounted 0.30 “ (7.62 mm) Browning machine guns in ventral and dorsal positions

A total of up to 1,500 lb (700 kg) of bombs on hardpoints under the fuselage (max. 1.000 lb; the SCG-2

could carry a single Mk. XIII torpedo) and under the wings (max. 325 lb per hardpoint, SCG-2 only 200 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

I had the idea to convert a PZL.23 into a carrier-borne light bomber on the agenda for a long time and also already a Heller kit stashed away – but it took the “In the Navy” group build at whatifmodelers.com in early 2020 to dig everything out from the stash and start the hardware phase.

 

Originally, this was inspired by a picture of a Ju 87D with USN “Yellow wings” markings which I came across while doing online research. This looked really good, but since the USN would never have accepted a liquid-cooled engine on one of its pre-WWII aircraft, the concept had IMHO some flaws. When I came across the PZL.23 in another context, I found that the aircraft, with its cockpit placed well forward and the generous window area, could also be a good carrier-based recce/light bomber/torpedo aircraft? This was the conceptual birth of the SBG.

 

The basis is the vintage, original Heller kit of the PZL.23: a VERY nice kit. It has been crisply molded, fit is very good, and even the interior detail is decent, e.g. with a nice fuselage structure and dashboard. Surface details are raised but very fine, and the styrene is also easy to handle.

 

Basically the PZL.23 was built OOB. The only changes I made are a crew of three figures (all Matchbox WWII pilots, two of them with their heads in different directions), a tail wheel instead of the original skid, an opening for an arrester hook under the fin (there’s even plausible space available!) and a new engine: the PZL.23’s bulky 9 cylinder Jupiter radial engine with its generous cowling and the two-blade propeller was completely replaced. The engine dummy is actually a matching R-2600 and comes from a Matchbox SB2C, even though its rear bulkhead was trimmed away so that it would fit into the new cowling. The latter came from an Italeri La-5FN, cut off long time ago from another conversion project, and I added a carburetor/oil cooler fairing underneath. Inside of the new engine I implanted a styrene tube which attaches the engine to the fuselage and also takes the metal axis of the new propeller, a (rather clumsy) donor from a Matchbox Douglas A-20G. The whole package works well, though, and gives the PZL.23 a more modern and different look.

 

A late modification is the glasshouse for the rear gunner. Since the PZL.23 offered considerable comfort for its crew, at least for pilot and observer, I thought that a closed rear position would make sense. I found an old rear gunner station glaizing from a vintage Airfix B-17G in the stash, and with some tailoring (including an opening for the OOB manual machine gun) the piece could be inserted into the fuselage opening. Small gaps were left, but these were simply filled with white glue. I think this was a good move, since it changes the PZL.23’s profile a little.

 

Other small cosmetic changes include the machine guns instead of the original large landing lights on the spats, an additional antenna mast and a cranked pitot, made from brass wire. Furthermore, I added small underwing bomb pylons and a ventral hardpoint with a scratched swing arm and a 500 lb iron bomb from an Academy kit.

  

Painting and markings:

For proper anachronism and some color in the shelf, I wanted the SBG to be a pre-WWII aircraft in the USN’s bright “Yellow Wings” markings, just like the Ju 87 mentioned above. As a slight twist, the fuselage was finished in all-over Light Gull Grey (FS 36440, Humbrol 40) instead of a NMF – some aircraft like F4Bs were finished this way, even though some fabric-covered parts were still painted with alu dope. In 1940, however, the bright colors would be replaced by a uniform light grey livery with subdued markings, anyway.

 

The aircraft’s individual markings were a bit tricky, because the USN has a very complicated color code system to identify not only the carrier to which an aircraft would belong, color markings would also identify the individual aircraft within a full squadron of 18 aircraft and its six sections. I won’t go into details, but I chose to depict the lead aircraft of section two of the scout bomber squadron on board of USS Enterprise.

 

For this carrier, the tail surfaces became blue (I used Modelmaster French Blue for the authentic “True Blue”), while the 2nd section had white aircraft markings on fuselage and wings. The lead aircraft (connected with the individual aircraft code “4”) had a full ring marking around the cowling. The fuselage band seems to be rather optional on bomber aircraft (more frequent on fighters?), but I eventually decided to add it - pictures suggest that probably only lead aircraft of a Section in the scout or torpedo squadrons carried this marking?

Like the cowling ring, it was painted with white and then black borders were added with decal strips. The wings were painted with Revell 310 (Lufthansa Yellow, RAL 1028), which is a pretty rich tone, and the section markings on top of them were fully created with decal material, a white 5mm stripe over a black 6mm stripe on each wing.

The aircraft’s tactical code was created from single US 45° numbers; the “S” had to be scratched from an “8”, since the decal sheet did not contain letters… Other decals were gathered from the scrap box and improvised.

 

After the free-standing exhaust pipes had been fixed, the kit received a light weathering treatment and was finally sealed with a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish (Italeri semi-gloss with some matt varnish added).

  

A colorful aircraft model, and the transformation from a Polish light bomber into an American armed scout aircraft worked well – for an interesting result with that anachronistic touch that many interwar designs carried. However, even though the conversion has been conceptually successful, I am not happy with the finish. The glossy Humbrol paints I used refused to cure properly, and the decals were also not without problems (e.g. when you realize that the roundels you wanted to use had a poor opacity, so that the yellow underneath shines blatantly through). But despite a lot of improvisation, the outcome is quite O.K.

 

Type: Trading figures.

Name: Star Wars Vehicle Collection set 4.

Brand: F-Toys.

Origin: Star Wars.

Scale: 1/144 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 historical facts. BEWARE!

.

 

Some background:

The mighty Suchoj SuCh-1 started its life in early March 1943, when the Sukhoi OKB finished work on the design of a high-speed fighter with a unique powerplant arrangement. The aircraft was an all-metal low-wing mono­plane with conventional tail surfaces. The three-section wings had constant dihedral and basically trapezoidal planform; the sta­bilizers had zero dihedral.

 

Two Klimov M-107 water-cooled Vee-12 engines, each with a. take-off power of 1 ,600 hp (1,193 kW) and a maximum design power of 1,500 hp (1,119 kW) at 5,500 m (18,045 ft), were mounted in the center fuse­lage in a staggered-tandem arrangement: the front engine was offset to starboard and of the rear one to port. Thus, the total power was increased but the drag was the same as for a single-engined aircraft, which was expected to increase fight speed consider­ably. Consequently, the project was internally designated 'I-2M107', literally "Article powered by two M107 engines".

 

Furthermore, the left cylinder bank of the front engine and the right cylinder bank of the rear engine were disposed vertically, so that each engine had one set of exhaust stubs on top of the fuselage and one on the fuselage side. Both engines drove a single three ­blade tractor propeller of 4.0 m (13 tt 2 in) diameter via parallel extension shafts and a common reduction gearbox. Both water radiators were located side by side in a chin housing, while the oil coolers were buried in the wings. The total fuel capacity of the four tanks arranged in the center fuselage was 1,113 litres (244.86 Imp. gal).

 

Because of the power plant arrangement and the large ground angle (necessary to give adequate ground clearance for the large propeller) the cockpit was offset to port and placed ahead of the wing leading edge to provide better forward visibility on take-off and landing. The cockpit was protected by a bulletproof windscreen, a front armor plate and an armored backrest; the armor weight totaled 70kg (154Ib).

 

The main landing gear units with 800 x 280 mm (31.5x11 in) wheels retracted inwards into the wing roots and the 400 x 150 mm (15.7 x 5.9 in) tail wheel retracted aft. The fighter's armament consisted of two wing-mounted 12.7-mm Berezin UBS machine-guns firing outside the propeller disc and a single 20-mm ShVAK cannon fir­ing through the propeller hub*.

 

A full-scale mock-up was inspected in December 1943, and with German long range bombers threatening the Western front line as well as the lack of a fast and powerful fighters to intercept them (the earlier MiG-5 had turned out to be a disappointment, and Mikoyan's I-211/221 family if high altitude fighters also suffered from serious technical problems at that time), OKB Suchoj received an immediate go-ahead for further development of the SuCh-1, how the I-2M107 was now officially called, since Vladimir A. Chizhevskiy took lead of the project.

 

In the course of 1944 three prototypes went through a fast development program. While the aircraft itself was easy to handle, overheating problems and trouble with the gearbox for the two engines could only partly be rectified - esp. the power transmission should remain the SuCh-1s Achilles Heel.

 

Anyway, the Su-5 was ready for service introduction towards late 1944, and the powerful type was exclusively to be used as an interceptor. Several improvements had been made, compared to the prototypes: now two slightly more powerful Klimov VK-107A engines were used, which were better suited for high altitude operations, and the chin-mounted water cooler was considerably enlarged. The oil coolers had been re-designed and they were now placed under the wing roots.

 

The wing span had been extended by 6' and a bigger (now 4.3m diameter!), four-bladed propeller was added in order to improve performance at high altitude. No pressurized cabin was installed, but the cockpit received an extended glazing for better all-round field of vision.

 

Armament had also been augmented: now a Nudelman N-23 23mm cannon was firing through the propeller hub, and the number of UBS machine-guns in the wings was increased to four.

 

As initial duty experience was gathered, it became quickly clear that the firepower had to be augmented, so that the propeller-hub-mounted 23mm cannon was quickly replaced by a Nudelman-Richter NR-37 37mm cannon, and the four wing-mounted UBS machine guns were replaced by two 20-mm ShVAK cannons or even two Nudelman N-23 23mm cannons - the latter became the production standard from March 1945 on, even though the type's designation did not change.

 

Experience also showed that the overheating problem had been cured, but the complicated gear box tended to malfunction, esp. when full power was called for in aerial combat: high G forces took their toll and damaged the bearings, even warping the extension shafts and structural parts, so that some SuCh-1 were literally torn apart in mid-air.

 

The high torque powers of the large propeller also took their toll on handling: starting and landing was described as "hazardous", esp. when the fuel tanks were empty or in cross winds.

Consequently, SuCh-1 pilots were warned to engage into any dogfight or enter close combat with single-engined enemy fighters, and just focus on large enemy aircraft.

 

On the other side, the SuCh-1's powerful cannon armament made it a deadly foe: a single hit with the NR-37 cannon could down an aircraft, and its top speed of roundabout 700 km/h (435 mph) was more than enough for the Luftwaffe's heavy bomber types like the He 177.

 

Several engine and armament experiments were undertaken. For instance, at least one SuCh-1 was outfitted with a Nudelman-Sooranov NS-45 45mm cannon firing through the propeller hub, even a 57mm cannon was envisaged. Furthermore, one airframe was prepared to carry two Charomskiy M-30V 12 cylinder diesel engines, in order to produce a heavy long-range escort fighter (internally called I-2M30V).

In order to minimize the torque problems a contraprop arrangement with two three-bladed propellers and a diameter of only 3.6m was under development.

 

All in all only 120 of these powerful machines were built until the end of hostilities, as the feared mass attacks of German long range bombers did not materialize. as the Su-7 was complicated to operate and jet engines promised a far more efficient way of propulsion for high speeds, the type was already retired in 1947 and replaced by 1st generation jet fighters like the Yak-15 and MiG-9, which carried a similar armament, attained a better performance (except for the range) but weighed only half of the large and heavy SuCh-1.

.

 

General characteristics

Crew: One

Length: 11.75 m (38 ft 5 3/4 in)

Wingspan: 13.85 m (45 ft 3 1/4 in)

Height: 5.30 m (17 ft 4 in)

Empty weight: 5.250 kg (11.565 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 8.100 kg (17.840 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Klimov VK-107A liquid-cooled V12 engines with an output of 1.650 hp (1.210 kW) each at sea level and 900 hp (650 kW) at 8.300m (27.220 ft)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 720 km/h (447 mph) at height, clean configuration

Range: 750 km (465 mi)

Service ceiling: 11.700 m (38.400 ft)

Rate of climb: 876 m/mim (2.850 ft/min)

 

Armament:

1× Nudelman-Richter NR-37 37mm cannon with 60 RPG, firing through the propeller hub

2× Nudelman N-23 23mm cannons with 120 RPG in the wings

Many different cannon and machine gun arrangements coulod be found, though.

 

*Information about the conceptual Suchoj I-2M107 was primarily gathered from the book 'OKB Suchoj', written by Yefim Gordon & Dmitriy Komissarov; Hersham (UK), 2010.

.

 

The kit and its assembly (a long story!):

This abomination of an aircraft is/was real, even though the I-2M107 was never built – the fictional name Suchoj-Chizhevskiy SuCh-1 was actually chosen because I could not find any plausible Su-X code for a WWII fighter. Vladimir A. Chizhevskiy actually joined the Suchoj OKB in mid WWII, so I deemed this alternative to be plausible.

 

I had this on the agenda for a long time, but the horrors of kitbashing kept me from building it - until now. The current Anthony P memorial Group Build (for the deceased fellow member at whatifmodelers.com, RIP) was a good motivation to tackle this brute thing. Fortunately, I already had some major ingredients in store, so work could start asap.

 

From that, anything else was improvised from the scrap box, and with only a three side view of the I-2M107 as guidance. It became a true Frankenstein creation with...

 

● Fuselage and inner wings from the (horrible) NOVO Attacker

● Wings from an Italeri Fw 190 D-9 attached to them

● Nose is a resin Griffon from an Avro Lincoln conversion set from OzMods

● Tail cone is a radar nose from an F-4J Phantom II

● Tail fin is a horizontal stabilizer from a Matchbox SB2C Helldiver

● Vertical stabilizers come from a Matchbox Me 410

● Oil coolers are modified front landing gear wells from two Revell G.91 kits

● Cockpit hood comes from a Revell P-39 Airacobra

● Landing gear comes from an Italeri Fw 190 D-9, covers were modified/improvised

● Main wheels belong to a MPM Ryan Dark Shark

● Tail wheel belongs to a Matchbox Harrier

● The propeller was scratched, IIRC from a Grumman Hellcat drop tank front and blades from an Airfix A-1 Skyraider. Inside, a metal axis was mounted.

.

 

Work started with the fuselage and the wings as separate segments.

 

The Attacker fuselage lost its fin and the cockpit and air intakes were simply cut away, just as the tail pipe. The resin Griffon was slightly shortened at the front, but more or less directly attached to the fuselage, after I had cut out openings for the four rows of exhaust nozzles.

Then, the new tail cone was glued onto the end and the original fairings for the Attacker's stabilizer cut away and sanded even - anything had to be made new.

 

The wings were a bit tricky. I had hoped to use the Attacker's OOB wings, but these were not only much too small and did not have the proper shape, they also lacked landing gear wells!

 

Finding a solution was not easy, and I had to improvise. After some trials I decided to cut the Attacker wing span at about the width where the guns are located, and then add Fw 190 wings.

The depth would be fine, even though the Fw 190 wings were a bit thicker, and they offered a leading edge kink which was good for the original and characteristic I-2M107's wing root extensions. The latter were sculpted from a 6mm thick core or styrene sheet, added to the Attacker parts' leading edge, and the rest, as well as the lacking Attacker wing's thickness, sculpted with 2C and later NC putty.

 

Furthermore I cut out and sculpted landing gear wells, another challenging, since these had to cover the Attacker/Fw 190 parts' intersection! LOTS of putty work, sanding and shaving, but as a benefit I was able to use the Attacker kit's original wing/fuselage joints. Effectively, my placement turned out to be a bit far outside, so the track appears too wide - the price to pay when you work on single parts. Anyway, I left it was it turned out, as a major correction at a late working stage would mean to tear anything apart again...

 

Back to the nose: adding the propeller and the cockpit into the massive nose was the next working station. The propeller had to be huge, and also needed a rather big spinner. A contraprop was ruled out, even though it would have looked great here. But eventually I settled for a scratch-built thing, made from a teardrop-shaped drop tank front onto which the four blades from a A-1 Skyraider were glued. Probably the biggest prop I have ever put onto a 1:72 scale model! Since the resin nose was massive, drilling a hole and adding a metal axis to the propeller was enough.

 

With that in place I started carving out a cockpit opening - it worked better and easier than expected with a mini drill and a coarse shaving head! The opening is still rather small, a seat and a pilot hardly fit, but it works - I found a rather smallish pilot figure, and added a seat and some other small details from the scrap box, just to have something inside.

 

For a canopy I found a very old (30 years, I guess...) clear part from a Revell P-39 Airacobra in the scrap box, which was almost perfect in shape and width. It was a bit blind and stained with ancient enamel paint, but some wet sanding and serious polishing almost got it back to translucent status. Since I would not open the cockpit, this was a sufficient solution.

 

The asymmetrical cockpit opening was, in an initial step, faired with styrene strips, for a rough outline, and then sculpted with 2C and later NC putty, blending it into the rest of the fuselage.

 

For the tail surfaces, the SB2C stabilizer was cut away at its base - it is not a bad donation piece, its shape and rudder come pretty close to the I-2M107's original design!

The stabilizers I used on my kitbash come from a Me 410, and their leading edge was a cut away so that the sweep angle would be a bit larger. They lack depth, compared to the I-2M107's original design, but since the wings have become more slender, too, I think it's a good compromise, and the best what I had at hand in the spares stash.

 

Finally, and before detail work could start, the wings were attached to the fuselage. I eventually set them back by ~6mm, so that the new, extended leading edge would match the respective fairing on the fuselage. The resulting gap at the trailing edge was, again, filled with 2C and NC putty.

 

A personal change was a different oil cooler arrangement. The original location was to be in the wings' leading edge, just in front of the landing gear wells - but that appeared a bit doubtful, as I could not find a plausible solution where the exit for the air would be? Consequently, and in order to avoid even more messy putty sculpting on the wings, I decided to re-locate the oil coolers completely, into shallow, tunnel-like fairings under the wing roots, not unlike the radiator arrangement on a Spitfire or Bf 109.

 

In order to check the surface quality I decided to add a coat of grey primer, once the fuselage/wing segments had been connected. This showed only minor flaws, but made another turn with NC putty and wet sanding necessary.

 

Now it was time for finishing touches, e .g. mounting the landing gear, completing the cockpit and adding exhaust stubs - cut individually from HO scale model railroad roof tiles and inserted into the four fuselage fairings.

 

The canopy was fixed into place with white glue, which also helped closing some small gaps.

.

 

Painting and markings:

While the I-2M107 looks odd, to say the least, I wanted to keep the paint scheme rather simple and quasi-authentic. I went for a pale grey/green camouflage, used e. g. on late war Yakovlev Yak-3 fighters.

 

Basic colors are Humbrol 31 (Slate Grey, it has a very greenish, even teal, hue), ModelMaster 1740 (Dark Gull Grey, FS 36231) and Humbrol 167 (Barley Grey) for the lower sides with a wavy waterline. Since only marginal surface details were left over, I decided to fake panels and panel lines with paint.

Panels were simulated with lighter shades of the basic tones (RLM 62 from ModelMaster, Humbrol 140 and 127 below), panel lines were painted with highly thinned grey acrylic paint and a special brush - in German it's called a 'Schlepppinsel', it's got very long hairs and is also used to paint scallops on car models, and similar things are used for real car tuning/custom paintwork, too.

Sure, the painted panel lines are a bit rough, but I did not want to risk any damage through manual engraving on the rather delicate mixed-media surface of the kitbashed model. For an overall look or first impression it's very good, though.

 

As 'highlights' I added a white spinner and half of the fin was painted white, too.

 

The decals were puzzled together. The flashes and the tactical code number come from a Hobby Boss La-7, the Red Stars, IIRC, belong to a vintage MiG-21F from Hasegawa. The "Rodinu" slogan actually belongs to a 1:35 Soviet Tank decals set.

 

Finally, after some additional dry painting with light grey, some oil stains around the engines and coolers and soot stains at the exhaust stubs and guns (painted, plus some grinded graphite, as it yields a nice, metallic shimmer that looks like oil or burnt metal), everything was sealed under a coat of matt acrylic varnish.

  

If it had been built, the Suchoj I-2M107 must have been an impressive aircraft - it was bigger than a P-47 Thunderbolt or an A-1 Skyraider, and one can only wonder how its field performance would have been?

Similar concepts had been underway in UK, too, e. g. for a heavy naval attack aircraft, but the I-2M107 with its asymmetrical cockpit and engine arrangement were unique. A worthy whif, even if some details like the landing gear or the borrowed nose section are not 100% 'correct'.

 

I had another TTV shot printed up at 20x20 mounted on styrene, and I'll be darned if it doesn't look pretty great. Big prints are so neat; I wish people (including myself) would do them more often.

+++ 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 TIE/LN starfighter, or TIE/line starfighter, simply known as the TIE Fighter or T/F, was the standard Imperial starfighter seen in massive numbers throughout most of the Galactic Civil War and onward.

The TIE Fighter was manufactured by Sienar Fleet Systems and led to several upgraded TIE models such as TIE/sa bomber, TIE/IN interceptor, TIE/D Defender, TIE/D automated starfighter, and many more.

 

The original TIEs were designed to attack in large numbers, overwhelming the enemy craft. The Imperials used so many that they came to be considered symbols of the Empire and its might. They were also very cheap to produce, reflecting the Imperial philosophy of quantity over quality.

 

However, a disadvantage of the fighter was its lack of deflector shields. In combat, pilots had to rely on the TIE/LN's maneuverability to avoid damage. The cockpit did incorporate crash webbing, a repulsorlift antigravity field, and a high-g shock seat to help protect the pilot, however these did next to nothing to help protect against enemy blaster fire.

 

Due to the lack of life-support systems, each TIE pilot had a fully sealed flight suit superior to their Rebel counterparts. The absence of a hyperdrive also rendered the light fighter totally dependent on carrier ships when deployed in enemy systems. TIE/LNs also lacked landing gear, another mass-reducing measure. While the ships were structurally capable of "sitting" on their wings, they were not designed to land or disembark their pilots without special support. On Imperial ships, TIEs were launched from racks in the hangar bays.

 

The high success rate of more advanced Rebel starfighters against standard Imperial TIE Fighters resulted in a mounting cost of replacing destroyed fighters and their pilots. That, combined with the realization that the inclusion of a hyperdrive would allow the fleet to be more flexible, caused the Imperial Navy to rethink its doctrine of using swarms of cheap craft instead of fewer high-quality ones, leading to the introduction of the TIE Advanced x1 and its successor, the TIE Avenger. The following TIE/D Defender as well as the heavy TIE Escort Fighter (or TIE/E) were touted as the next "logical advance" of the TIE Series—representing a shift in starfighter design from previous, expendable TIE models towards fast, well armed and protected designs, capable of hyperspace travel and long-term crew teams which gained experience and capabilities over time.

 

The TIE/E Escort, was a high-performance TIE Series starfighter developed for the Imperial Navy by Sienar Fleet Systems and it was introduced into service shortly before the Battle of Endor. It was a much heavier counterpart to the agile and TIE/D fighter, and more of an attack ship or even a light bomber than a true dogfighter. Its role were independent long range operations, and in order to reduce the work load and boost morale a crew of two was introduced (a pilot and a dedicated weapon systems officer/WSO). The primary duty profile included attack and escort task, but also reconnoiter missions. The TIE/E shared the general layout with the contemporary TIE/D fighter, but the cockpit section as well as the central power unit were much bigger, and the ship was considerably heavier.

 

The crew enjoyed – compared with previous TIE fighter designs – a spacious and now fully pressurized cockpit, so that no pressurized suits had to be worn anymore. The crew members sat in tandem under a large, clear canopy. The pilot in front had a very good field of view, while the WSO sat behind him, in a higher, staggered position with only a limited field of view. Both work stations had separate entries, though, and places could not be switched in flight: the pilot mounted the cockpit through a hatch on port side, while the WSO entered the rear compartment through a roof hatch.

 

In a departure from the design of previous TIE models, instead of two parallel wings to either side of the pilot module, the TIE Escort had three quadanium steel solar array wings mounted symmetrically around an aft section, which contained an I-s4d solar ionization reactor to store and convert solar energy collected from the wing panels. The inclusion of a third wing provided additional solar power to increase the ship's range and the ship's energy management system was designed to allow weapons and shields to be charged with minimum loss of power to the propulsion system.

 

Although it was based on the standard twin ion engine design, the TIE/E’s propulsion system was upgraded to the entirely new, powerful P-sz9.8 triple ion engine. This allowed the TIE/E a maximum acceleration of 4,220 G or 21 MGLT/s and a top speed of 144 MGLT, or 1,680 km/h in an atmosphere — almost 40 percent faster than a former standard TIE Fighter. With tractor beam recharge power (see below) redirected to the engines, the top speed could be increased to 180 MGLT in a dash.

In addition to the main thrusters located in the aft section, the TIE Escort's triple wing design allowed for three arrays of maneuvering jets and it featured an advanced F-s5x flight avionics system to process the pilot's instructions. Production models received a class 2, ND9 hyperdrive motivator, modified from the version developed for the TIE Avenger. The TIE/E also carried a Sienar N-s6 Navcon navigation computer with a ten-jump memory.

 

Special equipment included a small tractor beam projector, originally developed for the TIE Avenger, which could be easily fitted to the voluminous TIE Escort. Models produced by Ysanne Isard's production facility regularly carried such tractor beams and the technology found other uses, such as towing other damaged starfighters until they could achieve the required velocity to enter hyperspace. The tractor beam had limited range and could only be used for a short time before stopping to recharge, but it added new tactics, too. For instance, the beam allowed the TIE/E crews to temporarily inhibit the mobility of enemy fighters, making it easier to target them with the ship's other weapon systems, or prevent enemies from clear shots.

 

The TIE Escort’s weapons systems were primarily designed to engage bigger ships and armored or shielded targets, like armed freighters frequently used by the Alliance. Thanks to its complex weapon and sensor suite, it could also engage multiple enemy fighters at once. The sensors also allowed an effective attack of ground targets, so that atmospheric bombing was a potential mission for the TIE/E, too.

.

The TIE Escort Fighter carried a formidable array of weaponry in two modular weapon bays that were mounted alongside the lower cabin. In standard configuration, the TIE/E had two L-s9.3 laser cannons and two NK-3 ion cannons. The laser and ion cannons could be set to fire separately or, if concentrated power was required, to fire-linked in either pairs or as a quartet.

The ship also featured two M-g-2 general-purpose warhead launchers, each of which could be equipped with a standard load of three proton torpedoes or four concussion missiles. Depending on the mission profile, the ship could be fitted with alternative warheads such as proton rockets, proton bombs, or magnetic pulse warheads.

Additionally, external stores could be carried under the fuselage, which included a conformal sensor pallet for reconnaissance missions or a cargo bay with a capacity for 500 kg (1.100 lb).

 

The ship's defenses were provided by a pair of forward and rear projecting Novaldex deflector shield generators—another advantage over former standard TIE models. The shields were designed to recharge more rapidly than in previous Imperial fighters and were nearly as powerful as those found on capital ships, so that the TIE/E could engage other ships head-on with a very high survivability. The fighters were not equipped with particle shields, though, relying on the reinforced titanium hull to absorb impacts from matter. Its hull and wings were among the strongest of any TIE series Starfighter yet.

 

The advanced starfighter attracted the attention of several other factions, and the Empire struggled to prevent the spread of the technology. The ship's high cost, together with political factors, kept it from achieving widespread use in the Empire, though, and units were assigned only to the most elite crews.

 

The TIE/E played a central role in the Empire's campaign against rogue Grand Admiral Demetrius Zaarin, and mixed Defender and Escort units participated in several other battles, including the Battle of Endor. The TIE Escort continued to see limited use by the Imperial Remnant up to at least 44 ABY, and was involved in numerous conflicts, including the Yuuzhan Vong War..

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another group build contribution, this time to the Science Fiction GB at whatifmodelers.com during summer 2017. Originally, this one started as an attempt to build a vintage MPC TIE Interceptor kit which I had bought and half-heartedly started to build probably 20 years ago. But I did not have the right mojo (probably, The Force was not strong enough…?), so the kit ended up in a dark corner and some parts were donated to other projects.

 

The sun collectors were still intact, though, and in the meantime I had the idea of reviving the kit’s remains, and convert it into (what I thought was) a fictional TIE Fighter variant with three solar panels. For this plan I got myself another TIE Interceptor kit, and stashed it away, too. Mojo was still missing, though.

 

Well, then came the SF GB and I took it as an occasion to finally tackle the build. But when I prepared for the build I found out that my intended design (over the years) more or less actually existed in the Star Wars universe: the TIE/D Defender! I could have built it with the parts and hand and some improvisation, but the design similarity bugged me. Well, instead of a poor copy of something that was more or less clearly defined, I rather decided to create something more individual, yet plausible, from the parts at hand.

 

The model was to stay a TIE design, though, in order to use as much donor material from the MPC kits as possible. Doing some legwork, I settled for a heavy fighter – bigger than the TIE Interceptor and the TIE/D fighter, a two-seater.

Working out the basic concept and layout took some time and evolved gradually. The creative spark for the TIE/E eventually came through a Revell “Obi Wan’s Jedi Starfighter” snap fit kit in my pile – actually a prize from a former GB participation at phoxim.de (Thanks a lot, Wolfgang!), and rather a toy than a true model kit.

 

The Jedi Fighter was in so far handy as it carries some TIE Fighter design traits, like the pilot capsule and the characteristic spider web windscreen. Anyway, it’s 1:32, much bigger than the TIE Interceptor’s roundabout 1:50 scale – but knowing that I’d never build the Jedi Starfighter OOB I used it as a donor bank, and from this starting point things started to evolve gradually.

 

Work started with the cockpit section, taken from the Jedi Starfighter kit. The two TIE Interceptor cockpit tubs were then mounted inside, staggered, and the gaps to the walls filled with putty. A pretty messy task, and once the shapes had been carved out some triangular tiles were added to the surfaces – a detail I found depicted in SW screenshots and some TIE Fighter models.

 

Another issue became the crew – even though I had two MPC TIE Interceptors and, theorectically, two pilot figures, only one of them could be found and the second crewman had to be improvised. I normally do not build 1:48 scale things, but I was lucky (and happy) to find an SF driver figure, left over from a small Dougram hoovercraft kit (from Takara, as a Revell “Robotech” reboxing). This driver is a tad bigger than the 1:50 TIE pilot, but I went with it because I did not want to invest money and time in alternatives. In order to justify the size difference I decided to paint the Dougram driver as a Chiss, based on the expanded SW universe (with blue skin and hair, and glowing red eyes). Not certain if this makes sense during the Battle of Endor timeframe, but it adds some color to the project – and the cockpit would not be visible in much detail since it would be finished fully closed.

 

Reason behind the closed canopy is basically the poor fit of the clear part. OOB, this is intended as an action toy – but also the canopy’s considerable size in 1:50 would prevent its original opening mechanism.

Additional braces on the rel. large window panels were created with self-adhesive tape and later painted over.

 

The rear fuselage section and the solar panel pylons were scratched. The reactor behind the cockpit section is actually a plastic adapter for water hoses, found in a local DIY market. It was slightly modified, attached to the cockpit “egg” and both parts blended with putty. The tail opening was closed with a hatch from the OOB TIE Interceptor – an incidental but perfect match in size and style.

 

The three pylons are also lucky finds: actually, these are SF wargaming/tabletop props and would normally be low walls or barriers, made from resin. For my build, they were more or less halved and trimmed. Tilted by 90°, they are attached to the hull with iron wire stabilizers, and later blended to the hull with putty, too.

 

Once the cockpit was done, things moved more swiftly. The surface of the hull was decorated with many small bits and pieces, including thin styrene sheet and profiles, steel and iron wire in various strengths, and there are even 1:72 tank tracks hidden somewhere, as well as protective caps from syringes (main guns and under the rear fuselage). It’s amazing how much stuff you can add to such a model – but IMHO it’s vital in order to create some structure and to emulate the (early) Star Wars look.

  

Painting and markings:

The less spectacular part of the project, even though still a lot of work because of the sheer size of the model’s surface. Since the whole thing is fictional, I tried to stay true to the Imperial designs from Episode IV-VI and gave the TIE/E a simple, all-light grey livery. All basic painting was done with rattle cans.

Work started with a basic coat of grey primer. On top of that, an initial coat of RAL 7036 Platingrau was added, esp. to the lower surfaces and recesses, for a rough shading effect. Then, the actual overall tone, RAL 7047, called “Telegrau 4”, one of Deutsche Telekom’s corporate tones, was added - mostly sprayed from abone and the sides onto the model. Fuselage and panels were painted separately, overall assembly was one of the final steps.

 

The solar panels were to stand out from the grey rest of the model, and I painted them with Revell Acrylic “Iron Metallic” (91) first, and later applied a rather rich wash with black ink , making sure the color settled well into the many small cells. The effect is pretty good, and the contrast was slightly enhanced through a dry-brushing treatment.

 

Only a few legible stencils were added all around the hull (most from the scrap box or from mecha sheets), the Galactic Empire Seal were inkjet-printed at home, as well as some tactical markings on the flanks, puzzled together from single digits in "Aurebash", one of the Imperial SW languages/fonts.

For some variety and color highlights, dozens of small, round and colorful markings were die-punched from silver, yellow, orange, red and blue decal sheet and were placed all over the hull - together with the large panels they blur into the the overall appearance, though. The hatches received thin red linings, also made from generic decals strips.

 

The cockpit interior was a bit challenging, though. Good TIE Fighter cockpit interior pictures are hard to find, but they suggest a dark grey tone. More confusingly, the MPC instructions call for a “Dark Green” cockpit? Well, I did not like the all-grey option, since the spaceship is already monochrome grey on the outside.

 

As a compromise I eventually used Tamiya XF-65 "Field Grey". The interior recieved a black ink in and dry-brushing treatment, and some instruments ansd screens were created with black decal material and glossy black paint; some neon paint was used for sci-fi-esque conmtraol lamps everywhere - I did not pay too much intention on the interior, since the cockpit would stay closed, and the thick clear material blurs everything inside.

Following this rationale, the crew was also painted in arather minimal fashion - both wear a dark grey uniform, only the Chiss pilot stands aout with his light blue skin and the flourescent red eyes.

 

After an overall black ink wash the model received a dry brusing treatment with FS 36492 and FS 36495, for a weathered and battle-worn look. After all, the "Vehement" would not survive the Ballte of Endor, but who knows what became of TIE/E "801"'s mixed crew...?

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish, and some final cosmetic corrections made.

 

The display is a DIY creation, too, made from a 6x6" piece of wood, it's edges covered with edgebonder, a steel wire as holder, and finally the display was paited with semi-matt black acrylic paint from the rattle can.

  

A complex build, and the TIE/E more or less evolved along the way, with only the overall layout in mind. Work took a month, but I think it was worth the effort. This fantasy creation looks pretty plausible and blends well into the vast canonical TIE Fighter family - and I am happy that I finally could finish this mummy project, including the surplus Jedi Starfighter kit which now also find a very good use!

 

An epic one, and far outside my standard comfort zone. But a wothwhile build!

 

My summer project: A rural station inhabited by bike-riding apple-eating smiling folk, people who are happy their trains consistently run a little late and their butterflies have acrylonitrile butadiene styrene in their DNA.

 

I've had a number of ideas floating around in my head but I've never had the budget nor patience for a large scale layout. Causeway Crossing was a big step for me; I've always been frugal when building, concerned with future part availability. I made this my singular project, and I'm quite happy how it turned out. Lots I learned and lots to improve upon.

 

View no. 1

View no. 2

View no. 3

View no. 4

Details

+++ 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 XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

SAN is a very clear, glassy plastic often used for inexpensive drinkware. It is rigid and strong, but can turn yellow over time. Its clarity makes it great for prisms, and I believe LEGO also used it for windscreens from the 70 to early 90s.

+++ 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 XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

I'm so excited. I bought this built n scale building from ebay in early December. I was concerned it was taking so long to be delivered but I got it today. This building isn't made any more so when I saw it for sale on ebay I purchased it. It's such a great model and it's so well made but there's no floors inside the building and no window blinds. It's glued together too well to dismantle it and to add those details so I'll probably just black out the interior floors I also don't like how the walls are glued on the narrow side so I think I'm going to glue strips of painted styrene on the four corners to fix them up a little bit. I'm also going to add sidewalks, people, a mailbox and fire hydrant and other details.

I'm so excited. I bought this built n scale building from ebay in early December. I was concerned it was taking so long to be delivered but I got it today. This building isn't made any more so when I saw it for sale on ebay I purchased it. It's such a great model and it's so well made but there's no floors inside the building and no window blinds. It's glued together too well to dismantle it and to add those details so I'll probably just black out the interior floors I also don't like how the walls are glued on the narrow side so I think I'm going to glue strips of painted styrene on the four corners to fix them up a little bit. I'm also going to add sidewalks, people, a mailbox and fire hydrant and other details.

+++ 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:

When Marcel Dassault started work on jet-powered fighters after WWII, the development evolved in gradual steps instead of quantum leaps, leading to a long line of aircraft. The Mystère IV was an evolutionary development of the Mystère II aircraft. Although bearing an external resemblance to the earlier aircraft, the Mystère IV was in fact a new design with aerodynamic improvements for supersonic flight. The prototype first flew on 28 September 1952, and the aircraft entered service in April 1953. The first 50 Mystere IVA production aircraft were powered by British Rolls-Royce Tay turbojets, while the remainder had the French-built Hispano-Suiza Verdon 350 version of that engine.

 

France was the main operator of the Mystère IV. In April 1953 the United States government and the United States Air Force placed an order for 223 aircraft to be operated by the French, and at the peak usage the Armée de l‘air operated 6 squadrons. Most of the aircraft were purchased under a United States Offshore Procurement contract and many were returned to US custody after they were retired. The Mystère IVs were used in the 1956 Suez Crisis and continued to remain in French service into the 1980s, even though they were quickly relegated into second line duties as more capable types like the Super Mystère SM2B or the Mirage III entered service.

Other international operators included Israel (using about sixty Mystère IVs in large-scale combat during the 1967 Six Day War), India (104 aircraft procured in 1957 and extensively used in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965) and Ecuador.

 

The Fuerza Aérea Ecuatoriana (FAE, Ecuadorian Air Force) was officially created on October 27, 1920. However, like in many other countries, military flying activity already started before the formal date of birth of the Air Force. By 1939 the Ecuadorian Air Force was still limited to about 30 aircraft, though, and a staff of about 60, including 10 officers. Military aviation did not start in earnest until the early forties when an Ecuadorian mission to the United States resulted in the delivery of an assortment of aircraft for the Aviation school at Salinas: three Ryan PT-22 Recruits, six Curtiss-Wright CW-22 Falcons, six Fairchild PT-19A Cornells and three North American AT-6A Harvards arrived in March 1942, considerably boosting the capacity of the Escuela de Aviación at Salinas.

 

The 1950s and 1960s saw a further necessary buildup of the air force, gaining more units and aircraft, while efforts were made in enhancing the facilities at various airbases. In May 1961 the "First Air Zone" with its subordinate unit Ala de Transportes No.11 was founded. The "Second Air Zone" controlled the units in the southern half of Ecuador, Ala de Combate No.21 at Taura, Ala de Rescate No.22 at Guayaquil and Ala de Combate No.23 at Manta as well as the Escuela Superior Militar de Aviación "Cosme Rennella B." (ESMA) at Salinas.

It was at this time that the FAE was looking for a capable (yet affordable) jet fighter that would replace the vintage F-47 “Thunderbolt” piston engine fighters of American origin that had been operated since 1947 as well as the ageing fleet of Gloster Meteor jet fighters. After consulting various options, including the British Hawker Hunter and the American F-86 Sabre, Ecuador settled upon the French Mystère IV. A total of 32 aircraft were ordered in 1958 and delivered until early 1963 in two tranches, subsequently outfitting two combat squadrons.

 

The Ecuadorian aircraft resembled the early French Mystère IV standard and were powered by the British Rolls-Royce Tay 250. However, they differed in small details and incorporated some updates, leading to the individual designation Mystère IVE (for Ecuador). This included a modified instrumentation and a British Martin Baker ejection seat in the cockpit. On the outside, a fairing for a brake parachute at the fin’s base was the most obvious change, and there were small oval boundary layer fences on the wings’ leading edges that improved the aircraft’s handling. The front landing gear was slightly different, too, now outfitted with a mudguard.

 

To improve the aircraft’s capabilities in air-to-air combat, an American AN/APG-30 range-finding radar was fitted, mounted to the center of the air intake (under a slightly enlarged radome) and linked with the gyroscopic gunsight in the cockpit. It was effective at a range of up to 2.750 m, but only covered a narrow cone directly in front of the aircraft. Initially the aircraft were operated as pure fighters/interceptors, but soon they also took over ground attack and CAS missions with iron bombs and unguided missiles, even though the Mystère IV’s ordnance capacity was rather limited. But the aircraft had a good handling at low altitude and were a stable weapon platform, so that the pilots operated them with confidence.

 

In the early Seventies, Ecuador had plans to upgrade its Mystères with Pratt & Whitney J48-P-5 engines, a license-built version of the Rolls-Royce Tay from the USA and outfitted with an afterburner. With reheat the J48 delivered 8,750 lbf (38.9 kN) of thrust, but continuous dry thrust was only 6,350 lbf (28.2 kN), markedly less than the old Tay engine. The high fuel consumption with operating afterburner would have markedly limited the aircraft’s range, and this engine switch would have necessitated major modifications to the aircrafts’ tail section, so that the upgrade eventually did not come to fruition due the lack of funds and the rather limited and only temporary improvement in performance.

 

Nevertheless, in course of their career in Ecuador, the Mystères’ still underwent some modifications and modernizations. In the early Seventies an MLU program was carried out: the retractable pannier for unguided missiles was deleted in favor of an extra fuel tank and upgraded navigational and weapon avionics. The latter included wirings for IR-guided AIM-9B Sidewinder AAMs on the outer underwing pylons, what greatly improved the aircraft’s air-to-air capabilities. The original DEFA 552 guns were replaced with more modern DEFA 553s, which had a new feed system, a nitro-chrome plated steel barrel (which was longer than the 552’s and now protruded visibly from the openings), a forged drum casing, and improved electrical reliability. During this upgrade phase the machines also lost their original natural metal livery and they received a less conspicuous tactical NATO-style grey/green paint scheme with metallic-grey undersides.

 

In this form the Ecuadorean Mystère IVEs soldiered on well into the Eighties, with a very good reliability record. During their active career they even saw “hot” action on several occasions, for instance in a continuous border dispute with Peru, the so-called Paquisha War. This brief military clash over the control of three watch posts flared up in January 1981 and the Mystères became involved. The first incident was a dogfight with an A-37B of the Fuerza Aérea del Peru (FAP), launched from Guayaquil to intercept it – with no casualities, though. Several similar interception incidents happened until early February 1981, and the FAE Mystères also flew several CAS missions to repel the Peruvian Jungle Infantry and to support Ecuadorian ground forces. Despite their age, the aircrafts’ ruggedness and simplicity proved them to be reliable, and its high roll rate and good handling at low altitude made it a versatile platform that was still competitive, even though its rather sluggish acceleration turned out to be a serious weak spot, esp. in the country’s typical mountainous terrain. Its relatively low range with internal fuel only was another operational problem.

The Mystère IVEs were finally retired in 1988 and replaced by Mirage F.1C fighters from France and IAI Kfir C.7 fighter bombers from Israel.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 12.89 m (42 ft 3 in)

Wingspan: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in)

Height: 4.6 m (15 ft 1 in)

Wing area: 32.06 m² (345.1 sq ft)

Empty weight: 5,860 kg (12,919 lb)

Gross weight: 8,510 kg (18,761 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 9,500 kg (20,944 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Tay 250 centrifugal-flow turbojet engine with 34.32 kN (7,720 lbf) thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,110 km/h (690 mph, 600 kn) at sea level

Range: 915 km (569 mi, 494 nmi) with internal fuel only

2,280 km (1,420 mi; 1,230 nmi) with drop tanks

Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 40 m/s (7,900 ft/min)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA 553 cannon with 150 rounds per gun

1,000 kg (2,200 lb) of payload on four underwing hardpoints, incl. bombs, rockets or drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

A very simple project, and basically just an OOB kit in the colors of a fictional operator. The whole thing was inspired by the question: what could have been a predecessor of the Ecuadorean Mirage F.1s? Not an existential question that might pop up frequently, but I quickly decided that the Mystère IV would have been a good/plausible contender. I found this idea even more attractive when I considered a camouflage paint scheme for it, because you only get either French or Indian machines in a uniform NMF outfit or IDF Mystères in desert camouflage (either in brown/blue or the later sand/earth/green scheme).

 

The kit is the venerable Matchbox Mystère IVA, even though in its Revell re-boxing. It’s a very simple affair, with partly crude details like the landing gear or the dreaded “trenches” for engraved surface details, esp. on the wings. But it goes together quite well, and with some corrections and additions you get a decent model.

The kit was basically built OOB, I just added underwings pylons with some ordnance for a fighter bomber mission: a pair of drop tanks and two SNEB missile launcher pods (tanks leftover from a Sword F-94, IIRC, and the pods from a Matchbox G.91Y). A complete tub with a floor and with side consoles (origin is uncertain, though – maybe it came from an Xtrakit Supermarin Swift?) was fitted to the cockpit and the primitive OOB ejection seat was replaced with something more convincing, pimped with seatbelts (masking tape) and ejection trigger handles (thin wire).

 

The flaps were lowered for a more natural look, and I added small oval boundary layer fences from a BAe Hawk as a personal twist. The clumsy front wheel, originally molded onto the strut as a single piece, was replaced with something better. The main landing gear covers were replaced with thinner styrene sheet material (the OOB parts are VERY thick) and pieces from hollow steel needles were implanted into the respective fairings as gun barrels.

A thinner pitot, created from heated sprue material, was used instead of the rather massive OOB part. The ranging radar fairing in the intake was slightly enlarged with the help of white glue. And, finally, a piece of sprue was implanted into the fin’s base as a brake parachute fairing, reminiscent of the Polish Lim-6/7, license-produced MiG-17s.

  

Painting and markings:

Actually quite conservative, with a typical Seventies paint scheme in dark grey/dark green. I even considered a more exotic three-tone scheme but found that – together with the colorful national markings – this would look too busy. Since there is no reference for a Mystère IV in such a guise, I simply adapted the standard pattern from a Royal Air Force Supermarine Swift. For a different look than the standard RAF colors – after all, the fictional Ecuadorean Mystère IVs were painted with domestic material. I used Humbrol 75 (Bronze Green) and ModelMaster 2057 (FS 36173, USAF Neutral Grey) for a good contrast between the upper tones, with Humbrol 56 (Alu Dope) underneath.

 

The tail section received a burned metal look, using Revell 91 (Iron) and some graphite. The cockpit interior was painted in a very dark grey (Revell 09, Anthracite) while the landing gear became silver-grey and the wells zinc-chromate primer (Humbrol 81). For some contrast, the drop tanks became shiny aluminum (Revell 99).

 

The kit received a light black ink washing, primarily for the recessed panel lines, and a subtle panel post-shading – for a less uniform surface than for true weathering, I’d imagine that the aircraft would be looked after well. However, some gun soot stains around the weapon ports were added with graphite, too.

 

The Ecuadorean roundels and unit markings came from an Xtradecal Strikemaster sheet, the tactical codes from a Croco Decal sheet for various South-American trainers. The flag on the rudder was, due to its sweep, painted, and most stencils were taken from the Mystère’s OOB sheet or procured from an Ecuadorian Mirage V on a Carpena sheet.

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish, the ordnance was added and the position lights on the wing tips were created with silver and clear paint on top of that.

  

Well, this was not a spectacular conversion build, rather an OOB travesty with some cosmetic changes. However, the rather classic grey/green camouflage suits the tubby aircraft well and the bright national insignia really stand out on it – a pretty combo. The whole package as fictional Mystère IVE looks surprisingly convincing!

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on authentic facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The English Electric Skyspark was a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It remains the only UK-designed-and-built fighter capable of Mach 2. The Skyspark was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric, which was later merged into the newly-formed British Aircraft Corporation. Later the type was marketed as the BAC Skyspark.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 program. W.E.W. "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, was a keen early proponent of Britain's need to develop a supersonic fighter aircraft. In 1947, Petter approached the Ministry of Supply (MoS) with his proposal, and in response Specification ER.103 was issued for a single research aircraft, which was to be capable of flight at Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with F W "Freddie" Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, it had a 40° swept wing to keep the leading edge clear of the Mach cone. To mount enough power into the airframe, two engines were installed, in an unusual, stacked layout and with a high tailplane This proposal was submitted in November 1948, and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mock-up.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance. To achieve Mach 2 the wing sweep was increased to 60° with the ailerons moved to the wingtips. In late 1949, low-speed wind tunnel tests showed that a vortex was generated by the wing which caused a large downwash on the initial high tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1. In 1949, the Ministry of Supply had issued Specification F23/49, which expanded upon the scope of ER103 to include fighter-level manoeuvring. On 1 April 1950, English Electric received a contract for two flying airframes, as well as one static airframe, designated P.1.

 

The Royal Aircraft Establishment disagreed with Petter's choice of sweep angle (60 degrees) and the stacked engine layout, as well as the low tailplane position, was considered to be dangerous, too. To assess the effects of wing sweep and tailplane position on the stability and control of Petter's design Short Brothers were issued a contract, by the Ministry of Supply, to produce the Short SB.5 in mid-1950. This was a low-speed research aircraft that could test sweep angles from 50 to 69 degrees and tailplane positions high or low. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one. The proposed 60-degree wing sweep was retained, but the stacked engines had to give way to a more conventional configuration with two engines placed side-by-side in the tail, but still breathing through a mutual nose air intake.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury. These aircraft had been assigned the aircraft serials WG760, WG763, and WG765 (the structural test airframe). The prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, as the selected Rolls-Royce Avon engines had fallen behind schedule due to their own development problems. Since there was not much space in the fuselage for fuel, the thin wings became the primary fuel tanks and since they also provided space for the stowed main undercarriage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance. The narrow tires housed in the thin wings rapidly wore out if there was any crosswind component during take-off or landing. Outwardly, the prototypes looked very much like the production series, but they were distinguished by the rounded-triangular air intake with no center-body at the nose, short fin, and lack of operational equipment.

 

On 9 June 1952, it was decided that there would be a second phase of prototypes built to develop the aircraft toward achieving Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h); these were designated P.1B while the initial three prototypes were retroactively reclassified as P.1A. P.1B was a significant improvement on P.1A. While it was similar in aerodynamics, structure and control systems, it incorporated extensive alterations to the forward fuselage, reheated Rolls Royce Avon R24R engines, a conical center body inlet cone, variable nozzle reheat and provision for weapons systems integrated with the ADC and AI.23 radar. Three P.1B prototypes were built, assigned serials XA847, XA853 and XA856.

 

In May 1954, WG760 and its support equipment were moved to RAF Boscombe Down for pre-flight ground taxi trials; on the morning of 4 August 1954, WG760 flew for the first time from Boscombe Down. One week later, WG760 officially achieved supersonic flight for the first time, having exceeded the speed of sound during its third flight. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was plagued by directional stability problems and a dismal performance: Transonic drag was much higher than expected, and the aircraft was limited to Mach 0.98 (i.e. subsonic), with a ceiling of just 48,000 ft (14,630 m), far below the requirements.

 

To solve the problem and save the P.1, Petter embarked on a major redesign, incorporating the recently discovered area rule, while at the same time simplifying production and maintenance. The redesign entailed a new, narrower canopy, a revised air intake, a pair of stabilizing fins under the rear fuselage, and a shallow ventral fairing at the wings’ trailing edge that not only reduced the drag coefficient along the wing/fuselage intersection, it also provided space for additional fuel.

On 4 April 1957 the modified P.1B (XA847) made the first flight, immediately exceeding Mach 1. During the early flight trials of the P.1B, speeds in excess of 1,000 mph were achieved daily.

In late October 1958, the plane was officially presented. The event was celebrated in traditional style in a hangar at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough, with the prototype XA847 having the name ‘Skyspark’ freshly painted on the nose in front of the RAF Roundel, which almost covered it. A bottle of champagne was put beside the nose on a special rig which allowed the bottle to safely be smashed against the side of the aircraft.

On 25 November 1958 the P.1B XA847 reached Mach 2 for the first time. This made it the second Western European aircraft to reach Mach 2, the first one being the French Dassault Mirage III just over a month earlier on 24 October 1958

 

The first operational Skyspark, designated Skyspark F.1, was designed as a pure interceptor to defend the V Force airfields in conjunction with the "last ditch" Bristol Bloodhound missiles located either at the bomber airfield, e.g. at RAF Marham, or at dedicated missile sites near to the airfield, e.g. at RAF Woodhall Spa near the Vulcan station RAF Coningsby. The bomber airfields, along with the dispersal airfields, would be the highest priority targets in the UK for enemy nuclear weapons. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range – originally a radius of operation of only 150 miles (240 km) from the V bomber airfields was specified – and endurance. Armament consisted of a pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit, and two pylons for IR-guided de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles were added to the lower fuselage flanks. These hardpoints could, alternatively, carry pods with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets. The Ferranti AI.23 onboard radar provided missile guidance and ranging, as well as search and track functions.

 

The next two Skyspark variants, the Skyspark F.1A and F.2, incorporated relatively minor design changes, but for the next variant, the Skyspark F.3, they were more extensive: The F.3 had higher thrust Rolls-Royce Avon 301R engines, a larger squared-off fin that improved directional stability at high speed further and a strengthened inlet cone allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were all limited to Mach 1.7 (2,083 km/h). An upgraded A.I.23B radar and new, radar-guided Red Top missiles offered a forward hemisphere attack capability, even though additional electronics meant that the ADEN guns had to be deleted – but they were not popular in their position in front of the windscreen, because the muzzle flash blinded the pilot upon firing. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Skyspark yet, but this came at a steep price: higher fuel consumption, resulting in even shorter range. From this basis, a conversion trainer with a side-by-side cockpit, the T.4, was created.

 

The next interceptor variant was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3's shortcomings, the F.3A. The F.3A introduced two major improvements: a larger, non-jettisonable, 610-imperial-gallon (2,800 L) ventral fuel tank, resulting in a much deeper and longer belly fairing, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge. The conically cambered wing improved manoeuvrability, especially at higher altitudes, and it offered space for a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel by 716 imperial gallons (3,260 L). The enlarged ventral tank not only nearly doubled available fuel, it also provided space at its front end for a re-instated pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon with 120 RPG. Alternatively, a retractable pack with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets could be installed, or a set of cameras for reconnaissance missions. The F.3A also introduced an improved A.I.23B radar and the new IR-guided Red Top missile, which was much faster and had greater range and manoeuvrability than the Firestreak. Its improved infrared seeker enabled a wider range of engagement angles and offered a forward hemisphere attack capability that would allow the Skyspark to attack even faster bombers (like the new, supersonic Tupolev T-22 Blinder) through a collision-course approach.

Wings and the new belly tank were also immediately incorporated in a second trainer variant, the T.5.

 

The ultimate variant, the Skyspark F.6, was nearly identical to the F.3A, with the exception that it could carry two additional 260-imperial-gallon (1,200 L) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability, even though their supersonic drag was so high that the extra fuel would only marginally raise the aircraft’s range when flying beyond the sound barrier for extended periods.

 

Finally, there was the Skyspark F.2A; it was an early production F.2 upgraded with the new cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 imperial gallons (2,800 L) ventral tank. However, the F.2A retained the old AI.23 radar, the IR-guided Firestreak missile and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Skysparks, it had the longest tactical range of all variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over West Germany.

 

The first Skysparks to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, joining the Air Fighting Development Squadron (AFDS) of the Central Fighter Establishment, where they were used to clear the Skyspark for entry into service. The production Skyspark F.1 entered service with the AFDS in May 1960, allowing the unit to take part in the air defence exercise "Yeoman" later that month. The Skyspark F.1 entered frontline squadron service with 74 Squadron at Coltishall from 11 July 1960. This made the Skyspark the second Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the second fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe (the first one in both categories being the Swedish Saab 35 Draken on 8 March 1960 four months earlier).

 

The aircraft's radar and missiles proved to be effective, and pilots reported that the Skyspark was easy to fly. However, in the first few months of operation the aircraft's serviceability was extremely poor. This was due to the complexity of the aircraft systems and shortages of spares and ground support equipment. Even when the Skyspark was not grounded by technical faults, the RAF initially struggled to get more than 20 flying hours per aircraft per month compared with the 40 flying hours that English Electric believed could be achieved with proper support. In spite of these concerns, within six months of the Skyspark entering service, 74 Squadron was able to achieve 100 flying hours per aircraft.

 

Deliveries of the slightly improved Skyspark F.1A, with revised avionics and provision for an air-to-air refueling probe, allowed two more squadrons, 56 and 111 Squadron, both based at RAF Wattisham, to convert to the Skyspark in 1960–1961. The Skyspark F.1 was only ordered in limited numbers and served only for a short time; nonetheless, it was viewed as a significant step forward in Britain's air defence capabilities. Following their replacement from frontline duties by the introduction of successively improved Skyspark variants, the remaining F.1 aircraft were employed by the Skyspark Conversion Squadron.

The improved F.2 entered service with 19 Squadron at the end of 1962 and 92 Squadron in early 1963. Conversion of these two squadrons was aided by the of the two-seat T.4 and T.5 trainers (based on the F.3 and F.3A/F.6 fighters), which entered service with the Skyspark Conversion Squadron (later renamed 226 Operational Conversion Unit) in June 1962. While the OCU was the major user of the two-seater, small numbers were also allocated to the front-line fighter squadrons. More F.2s were produced than there were available squadron slots, so later production aircraft were stored for years before being used operationally; some of these Skyspark F.2s were converted to F.2As.

 

The F.3, with more powerful engines and the new Red Top missile was expected to be the definitive Skyspark, and at one time it was planned to equip ten squadrons, with the remaining two squadrons retaining the F.2. However, the F.3 also had only a short operational life and was withdrawn from service early due to defence cutbacks and the introduction of the even more capable and longer-range F.6, some of which were converted F.3s.

 

The introduction of the F.3 and F.6 allowed the RAF to progressively reequip squadrons operating aircraft such as the subsonic Gloster Javelin and retire these types during the mid-1960s. During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Skyspark's range and firepower shortcomings became increasingly apparent. The transfer of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs from Royal Navy service enabled these much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAF's interceptor force, alongside those withdrawn from Germany as they were replaced by SEPECAT Jaguars in the ground attack role.

The Skyspark's direct replacement was the Tornado F.3, an interceptor variant of the Panavia Tornado. The Tornado featured several advantages over the Skyspark, including far larger weapons load and considerably more advanced avionics. Skysparks were slowly phased out of service between 1974 and 1988, even though they lasted longer than expected because the definitive Tornado F.3 went through serious teething troubles and its service introduction was delayed several times. In their final years, the Skysparks’ airframes required considerable maintenance to keep them airworthy due to the sheer number of accumulated flight hours.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 51 ft 2 in (15,62 m) fuselage only

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14,092 kg) with armament and no fuel

Gross weight: 41,076 lb (18,632 kg) with two Red Tops, ammunition, and internal fuel

Max. takeoff weight: 45,750 lb (20,752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojet engines,

12,690 lbf (56.4 kN) thrust each dry, 16,360 lbf (72.8 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph+ at 40,000 ft)

Range: 738 nmi (849 mi, 1,367 km)

Combat range: 135 nmi (155 mi, 250 km) supersonic intercept radius

Range: 800 nmi (920 mi, 1,500 km) with internal fuel

1,100 nmi (1,300 mi; 2,000 km) with external overwing tanks

Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

Zoom ceiling: 70,000 ft (21,000 m)

Rate of climb: 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s) sustained to 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

Time to altitude: 2.8 min to 36,000 ft (11,000 m)

Wing loading: 76 lb/sq ft (370 kg/m²) with two AIM-9 and 1/2 fuel

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) ADEN cannon with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage

2× forward fuselage hardpoints for a single Firestreak or Red Top AAM each

2× overwing pylon stations for 2.000 lb (907 kg each)

for 260 imp gal (310 US gal; 1,200 l) ferry tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was a submission to the “Hunter, Lightning, Canberra” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and one of my personal ultimate challenges – a project that you think about very often, but the you put the thought back into its box when you realize that turning this idea into hardware will be a VERY tedious, complex and work-intensive task. But the thematic group build was the perfect occasion to eventually tackle the idea of a model of a “side-by-side engine BAC Lightning”, a.k.a. “Flatning”, as a rather conservative alternative to the real aircraft’s unique and unusual design with stacked engines in the fuselage, which brought a multitude of other design consequences that led to a really unique aircraft.

 

And it sound so simple: take a Lightning, just change the tail section. But it’s not that simple, because the whole fuselage shape would be different, resulting in less depth, the wings have to be attached somewhere and somehow, the landing gear might have to be adjusted/shortened, and how the fuselage diameter shape changes along the hull, so that you get a more or less smooth shape, was also totally uncertain!

 

Initially I considered a MiG Ye-152 as a body donor, but that was rejected due to the sheer price of the only available kit (ModelSvit). A Chinese Shenyang J-8I would also have been ideal – but there’s not 1:72 kit of this aircraft around, just of its successor with side intakes, a 1:72 J-8II from trumpeter.

I eventually decided to keep costs low, and I settled for the shaggy PM Model Su-15 (marketed as Su-21) “Flagon” as main body donor: it’s cheap, the engines have a good size for Avons and the pen nib fairing has a certain retro touch that goes well with the Lightning’s Fifties design.

The rest of this "Flatning" came from a Hasegawa 1:72 BAC Lightning F.6 (Revell re-boxing).

 

Massive modifications were necessary and lots of PSR. In an initial step the Flagon lost its lower wing halves, which are an integral part of the lower fuselage half. The cockpit section was cut away where the intake ducts begin. The Lightning had its belly tank removed (set aside for a potential later re-installation), and dry-fitting and crude measures suggested that only the cockpit section from the Lightning, its spine and the separate fin would make it onto the new fuselage.

 

Integrating the parts was tough, though! The problem that caused the biggest headaches: how to create a "smooth" fuselage from the Lightning's rounded front end with a single nose intake that originally develops into a narrow, vertical hull, combined with the boxy and rather wide Flagon fuselage with large Phantom-esque intakes? My solution: taking out deep wedges from all (rather massive) hull parts along the intake ducts, bend the leftover side walls inwards and glue them into place, so that the width becomes equal with the Lightning's cockpit section. VERY crude and massive body work!

 

However, the Lightning's cockpit section for the following hull with stacked engines is much deeper than the Flagon's side-by-side layout. My initial idea was to place the cockpit section higher, but I would have had to transplant a part of the Lightning's upper fuselage (with the spine on top, too!) onto the "flat" Flagon’s back. But this would have looked VERY weird, and I'd have had to bridge the round ventral shape of the Lightning into the boxy Flagon underside, too. This was no viable option, so that the cockpit section had to be further modified; I cut away the whole ventral cockpit section, at the height of the lower intake lip. Similar to my former Austrian Hasegawa Lightning, I also cut away the vertical bulkhead directly behind the intake opening - even though I did not improve the cockpit with a better tub with side consoles. At the back end, the Flagon's jet exhausts were opened and received afterburner dummies inside as a cosmetic upgrade.

 

Massive PSR work followed all around the hull. The now-open area under the cockpit was filled with lead beads to keep the front wheel down, and I implanted a landing gear well (IIRC, it's from an Xtrakit Swift). With the fuselage literally taking shape, the wings were glued together and the locator holes for the overwing tanks filled, because they would not be mounted.

 

To mount the wings to the new hull, crude measurements suggested that wedges had to be cut away from the Lightning's wing roots to match the weird fuselage shape. They were then glued to the shoulders, right behind the cockpit due to the reduced fuselage depth. At this stage, the Lightning’s stabilizer attachment points were transplanted, so that they end up in a similar low position on the rounded Su-15 tail. Again, lots of PSR…

 

At this stage I contemplated the next essential step: belly tank or not? The “Flatning” would have worked without it, but its profile would look rather un-Lightning-ish and rather “flat”. On the other side, a conformal tank would probably look quite strange on the new wide and flat ventral fuselage...? Only experiments could yield an answer, so I glued together the leftover belly bulge parts from the Hasegawa kit and played around with it. I considered a new, wider belly tank, but I guess that this would have looked too ugly. I eventually settled upon the narrow F.6 tank and also used the section behind it with the arrestor hook. I just reduced its depth by ~2 mm, with a slight slope towards the rear because I felt (righteously) that the higher wing position would lower the model’s stance. More massive PSR followed….

 

Due to the expected poor ground clearance, the Lightning’s stabilizing ventral fins were mounted directly under the fuselage edges rather than on the belly tank. Missile pylons for Red Tops were mounted to the lower front fuselage, similar to the real arrangement, and cable fairings, scratched from styrene profiles, were added to the lower flanks, stretching the hull optically and giving more structure to the hull.

 

To my surprise, I did not have to shorten the landing gear’s main legs! The wings ended up a little higher on the fuselage than on the original Lightning, and the front wheel sits a bit further back and deeper inside of its donor well, too, so that the fuselage comes probably 2 mm closer to the ground than an OOB Lightning model. Just like on the real aircraft, ground clearance is marginal, but when the main wheels were finally in place, the model turned out to have a low but proper stance, a little F8U-ish.

  

Painting and markings:

I was uncertain about the livery for a long time – I just had already settled upon an RAF aircraft. But the model would not receive a late low-viz scheme (the Levin, my mono-engine Lightning build already had one), and no NMF, either. I was torn between an RAF Germany all-green over NMF undersides livery, but eventually went for a pretty standard RAF livery in Dark Sea Grey/Dark Green over NMF undersides, with toned-down post-war roundels.

A factor that spoke in favor of this route was a complete set of markings for an RAF 11 Squadron Lightning F.6 in such a guise on an Xtradecal set, which also featured dayglo orange makings on fin, wings and stabilizers – quite unusual, and a nice contrast detail on the otherwise very conservative livery. All stencils were taken from the OOB Revell sheet for the Lightning. Just the tactical code “F” on the tail was procured elsewhere, it comes from a Matchbox BAC Lightning’s sheet.

 

After basic painting the model received the usual black ink washing, some post-panel-shading and also a light treatment with graphite to create soot strains around the jet exhausts and the gun ports, and to emphasize the raised panel lines on the Hasegawa parts.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final bits and pieces like the landing gear and the Red Tops (taken OOB) were mounted.

  

A major effort, and I have seriously depleted my putty stocks for this build! However, the result looks less spectacular than it actually is: changing a Lightning from its literally original stacked engine layout into a more conservative side-by-side arrangement turned out to be possible, even though the outcome is not really pretty. But it works and is feasible!

+++ 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.

+++ 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.

 

"Hawaiian Pineapple Resort"

420mm x 420mm x 700mm

16.5" x 16.5" x 27.5"

 

steel/ resin clay/ resin/ plaster/ plastic/ balsa veneer sheet/ epoxy putty/ FRP/ styrene foam/ LED lighting

 

Private Collection since 2011

 

All images copyright TOKYO GOOD IDEA Development Institute Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

www.tokyogoodidea.com

 

Lego (/ˈlɛɡoʊ/ ⓘ, LEG-oh; Danish: [ˈle̝ːko]; stylised as LEGO) is a line of plastic construction toys manufactured by the Lego Group, a privately held company based in Billund, Denmark. Lego consists of variously coloured interlocking plastic bricks made of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) that accompany an array of gears, figurines called minifigures, and various other parts. Its pieces can be assembled and connected in many ways to construct objects, including vehicles, buildings, and working robots. Assembled Lego models can be taken apart, and their pieces can be reused to create new constructions.

 

The Lego Group began manufacturing the interlocking toy bricks in 1949. Moulding is done in Denmark, Hungary, Mexico, and China. Brick decorations and packaging are done at plants in the former three countries and in the Czech Republic. Annual production of the bricks averages approximately 36 billion, or about 1140 elements per second. One of Europe's biggest companies, Lego is the largest toy manufacturer in the world by sales. As of July 2015, 600 billion Lego parts had been produced.

 

Lego maintains a large fan community based around building competitions and custom creations, and a range of films, games, and ten Legoland amusement parks have been developed under the brand.

  

+++ 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 Gotha 146 was a fast reconnaissance aircraft that was used throughout WWII by the German Luftwaffe, and one of the results of a mutual technology exchange program with Japan. The Go 146 was actually a license-built, but modified variant of the excellent Mitsubishi Ki-46. The latter type's career started in late 1937, when the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force issued a specification to Mitsubishi for a long-range strategic reconnaissance aircraft to replace the Mitsubishi Ki-15. The specification demanded an endurance of six hours and sufficient speed to evade interception by any fighter in existence or development at that time, but otherwise did not constrain the design by a team led by Tomio Kubo.

 

The resulting design was a twin-engine, low-winged monoplane with a retractable tailwheel undercarriage. It had a small diameter oval fuselage with the pilot and observer situated in individual cockpits separated by a large fuel tank. The engines, two Mitsubishi Ha-26 radials, were housed in close-fitting cowlings to reduce drag and improve pilot view.

 

The first prototype aircraft, flew in November 1939 from the Mitsubishi factory at Kakamigahara, Gifu. Tests showed that the Ki-46 was underpowered and slower than required, only reaching 540 km/h (336 mph) rather than the specified 600 km/h (373 mph), but, otherwise, the aircraft tests were successful. As the type was still faster than the Army's latest fighter, the Nakajima Ki-43, as well as the Navy's new A6M2, an initial production batch was ordered. To solve the performance problems, Mitsubishi switched to Ha-102 engines, which were Ha-26s fitted with a two-stage supercharger, while increasing fuel capacity and reducing empty weight. This became the Ki-46-II, and this type was also demonstrated to German officials who immediately noticed its potential.

 

Knowing that the German Luftwaffe lacked this specialized, fast type of aircraft (German reconnaissance aircraft of that time were either slow artillery observation types, or variants of bombers or heavy fighters), the RLM immediately asked for a batch of airframe kits to adapt it to the European theatre and test its capabilities. Seven engine-less airframe kits were delivered to Germany in early 1940. In the meantime, with the help of blueprints and other documentations, an alternative engine installation had been devised: the “Germanized” aircraft was to be powered by liquid-cooled DB 601 engines, which delivered more power than the Ha-102 and offered improved aerodynamics, despite the necessity to add radiators under the outer wings. Many stock parts from the contemporary Messerschmitt Bf 110 heavy fighter were incorporated, so that the development time was very short, and the commonality of mechanical parts eased logistics and maintenance.

 

In May 1940 the first batch of the Gotha 146 A-0 pre-production aircraft (which had officially been described as a further development of a four seat, twin-engine transport aircraft from the 1930s to cloud its origins and mission) was ready. They were immediately transferred to the Western Front for field tests, and the specialized Go 146 became quickly popular among its crews. It was fast, agile and easy to fly – almost on par with state-of-the-art fighters like the Bf 109. During the test phase in summer 1940 the Go 146 proved to be slightly faster than its Japanese Ki-46 ancestor, and with a top speed of more than 375 mph (600 km/h) it was hard to intercept by any British or French fighter of the time. The results were so convincing that the type was ordered into serial production, and from October 1940 on the Go 146 A-1 was produced in limited numbers at the Gothaer Waggonfabrik in Thuringia. Even though production only ran at small scale, it was continuous, and the Go 146 was steadily developed further, including the change of the nose section that came with the Ki-46-III, stronger engines and an improved defensive armament.

 

This evolution led to the Go 146 B, which had the traditional stepped windshield replaced with a smooth, curved, glazed panel extended over the pilot's seat. It not only gave a more aerodynamic nose profile, the re-shaped nose also offered room for an extra fuel tank. The space between the two crewmen, connected with a crawl tunnel, held another fuel tank, the radio equipment (a Sprechfunkgerät FuG 16 ZY and a FuG 25a „Erstling“ IFF beacon), as well as a compartment for up to three cameras with several ventral windows, which could take Rb (“Reihenbildner” = serial picture device) 20/30, 50/30 and 75/30 devices that could be mounted in different combinations and angles as needed.

Power came now from a pair of new Daimler-Benz DB 603A liquid-cooled piston engines, which offered 1,290 kW (1,750 hp) each for take-off. Since the engine mounts had to be re-designed for the DB603s (the Go 146 A had used adapters to attach its shorter DB 601s to the original Ha-102 radials’ hardpoints), German engineers used the opportunity to redesign the complete engine nacelles. As a result, their diameter and “wet” surface was reduced, so much that the landing gear had to be modified, too. It now rotated 90° upon retraction, so that the main wheels were lying in shallow wells within the wing structure. Beyond better aerodynamics, structural measures saved almost 250 kg (550 lb).

 

Instead of the Go 146 A’s single 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 machine gun in the observer's cabin, facing rearwards, the defensive armament was improved and consisted of a pair of 13 mm (0.51 in) MG 131 machine guns, firing rearward from FDSL 131/1B remotely-operated barbettes, one per side. This rather complex installation had become possible (and in part necessary) due to a center of gravity shift from the modified engines and their empennage. The weapons were aimed by the rear crewman through a periscope that covered both the upper and lower rear hemisphere. The control unit had a rotating transverse crossbar with a sideways-pivoting handgun-style grip and trigger at its center, "forked" at its forward pivoting end to fit around the crossbar, with the upper fork extended beyond the rotating crossbar to mount the gunsight. This unique aiming and control scheme rotated the crossbar axially, when the handgrip was elevated or depressed, to aim the guns vertically by rotating both turrets together, and a sideways movement of the handgrip would pivot either one of the guns outwards from the fuselage-mounted turrets for diagonal firing. The guns were electrically fired, and an electrical contact breaker prevented the gunner from shooting off the aircraft’s tailplane. When not in use, the guns would return to a neutral position that would allow to fire directly backwards with both guns.

Furthermore, plumbed hardpoints were added to the inner wings, just inside of the engines. These could carry a 300 l drop tank each for an extended range and loiter time. Single bombs of up to 250 kg or racks with four 50 kg bombs each were theoretically possible too, but the aircraft lacked any bomb aiming support. Crew protection was slightly improved, too, but the airframe was overall kept as light as possible. Despite these efforts, however, MTOW rose to 6,500 kg (14,317 lb), but this was still relatively light in comparison with the similar contemporary Me 410 multi-purpose aircraft, which weighed more than 9 tons and was powered by similar engines. Consequently, and thanks to its clean lines, the G 146 B had a top speed of almost 700 km/h (434 mph) at ideal altitude and the aircraft retained its excellent handling, even though its structure was rather fragile and could not take much stress and punishment.

 

Two versions of the Go 146 B were produced, steadily but only at a low rate because the aircraft received, due to its highly specialized role and limited offensive capabilities, only a low priority. The B-1 was the main variant and kept the A version’s standard wing, a total of 54 were produced between 1943 and 1945. Additionally, the B-2 was produced between late 1943 and early 1944 as a dedicated high altitude photo reconnaissance aircraft. This sub-variant had an extended wingspan of 16.00 m (52 ft 5 in) instead of the standard 14.70 m (48 ft 2¾ in) and an improved oxygen system, even though the cabin was not pressurized. Its maximum service ceiling was almost 12.000 m (39.305 ft), with a maximum speed of 415 mph (668 km/h), a cruise speed of 250 mph (400 km/h) and a range of 3,200 km (1,987 nmi). Only twelve of these machines were produced and put into service, primarily for flights over Southern Great Britain. When the Arado Ar 234 became available from September 1944 on, though, this new, jet-powered type immediately replaced the Go 146 B-2 because it offered even better performance. Therefore, the B-3, a planned version with a fully pressurized cabin and an even bigger wingspan of 19.00 m, never left the drawing board.

 

Furthermore, the RLM had idea to convert the fast Go 146 into a fighter amd even a night fighter in mid-1944 as the “C” series. But these plans were not executed because the light airframe could hardly be adapted to heavy weapons or equipment like a radar set, and it was unsuited for vigorous dogfighting. The type’s poor climbing rate made it ineffective as an interceptor, too. There were, nevertheless, tests with at least one Go 146 B-1 that carried four Werfer-Granate 21 rocket launchers under the outer wings, as a fast bomber interceptor esp. against the high-flying B-29, which was expected to appear over continental Europe soon. But this kind of weaponry never reached frontline units and the Go 146 was never operated as a fighter of any kind.

There were, however, other uses: in 1944 the Go 146 was enlisted as a fast liaison aircraft for the RLM (Ministry of Aviation) in Berlin. Stripped off of any armament and cameras and outfitted with two passenger seats in the rear cabin, at least one Go 146 B (with the confirmed registration “ST+ZA”, others in similar configuration may have existed, too) was operated by the RLM’s Zentralabteilung (central command) from Tempelhof airfield for top brass officials between Luftwaffe locations on German terrain. ST+ZA’s fate after January 1945 is uncertain, though.

  

Specifications:

Crew: two (pilot and observer)

Length: 11.00 m (36 ft 1 in)

Wingspan: 14.70 m (48 ft 2¾ in)

Height: 3.88 m (12 ft 8¾ in)

Wing area: 32.0 m² (344 ft²)

Empty weight: 3,830 kg (8,436 lb)

Loaded weight: 5,661 kg (12,480 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 6,500 kg (14,317 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Daimler-Benz DB 603A V-12 inverted liquid-cooled piston engines, rated at:

- 1,290 kW (1,750 hp) each for take-off

- 1,360 kW (1,850 PS) at 2,100 m (6,890 ft)

- 1,195 kW (1,625 PS) at 5,700 m (18,700 ft)

- 1,162 kW (1580 PS) combat power at 2500 rpm at sea level

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 695 km/h (377 knots, 430 mph) at 5,800 m (19,000 ft)

Cruise speed: 450 km/h (245 knots, 280 mph)

Range: 2,800 km (1,522 nmi, 1,740 mi) with internal fuel

Service ceiling: 11,250 m (36,850 ft)

Wing loading: 157.8 kg/m² (32.3 lb/ft²)

Climb rate: 14.7 m/sec (2,900 feet per minute)

Climb to 8,000 m (26,250 ft): 15 min 20 sec

 

Armament:

2× 13 mm (0.51 in) defensive MG 131 machine guns with 500 RPG,

each firing rearward from FDSL 131/1B remote-operated turret, one per side

2× underwing hardpoints under the inner wings for 250 kg (550 lb) each,

typically occupied by 300 l drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a déjà vu build: I already did a “Germanized” Ki-46 in 2015, it was an Airfix Ki-46-II outfitted with DB 601s from a Bf 110 as a pre-series Gotha Go 146 A-0, an aircraft that (naturally) never existed but appeared plausible, since German military hardware including aircraft had been evaluated by Japanese forces. And why should this exchange not have worked the other way around, too? However, as I built this modified Dinah for the first time, I already thought that the basic idea had more potential than just one model, and the streamlined Ki-46-III just lent itself for an updated, later version.

 

This B-2 variant of the Go 146 was based on the LS Models/ARII Ki-46-III. Like the Airfix kit (its molds are from 1965, and that’s just what the kit feels, looks and builds like…), it’s a rather vintage offering, but it is in many aspects markedly ahead, with fine surfaces, recessed details, 3D engines and clear parts that actually fit into their intended places. The LS Models kit’s 10 years less of age are recognizable, and there are three boxings around with different versions of the aircraft (a Ki-46-II, a -III and a trainer with a raised tutor cockpit), differing in small extra sprues for the respective fuselage parts, but they all share a common sprue with the clear parts for all three versions.

 

The Ki-46-III kit was taken OOB, with just some minor mods. The most obvious change concerns the engines: they were transplanted from a Bilek Me 210, together with the underwing radiators outside of the nacelles. The Me 210, even though it’s from 1997, is a rather mediocre model with some dubious solutions, therefore earmarked for a conversion and ready to donor some body parts… The engine switch was insofar easy because the Ki-46 kit comes with completely separate parts for the engines and their fairings which also contain the main landing gear wells.

Because of this “clean” basis I decided to cut the nacelles out from the Me 210 and attach them to the Ki-46 wings, so that the DB 603 engines would have perfect attachment points. While this was a bigger overall surgery stunt than on the earlier Airfix Dinah, this was easier than expected and resulted in a cleaner solution that also underlines the Ki-46’s clean and slender shape. The modified nacelles were much smaller than the Dinah’s, though. The main wheels were replaced with slightly smaller and narrower ones from the scrap box.

 

Inside of the cockpit, I implanted a dashboard. In the rear cabin the seat was reversed and moved further forward. In the cabin’s rear a scratched targeting scope/weapon control column for the FDSL 131 installation was added. Since I left the single-part canopies (which are quite thick but very clear) closed I outfitted the model with a crew. The Ki-46 III kit comes with a pair of figures, but they are very small (H0 scale, at best!) and look goofy, so that I exchanged them with Matchbox WWII pilots, which had their legs bent and their bottoms cut away to make them fit into the tight fuselage and under the canopies.

 

Unfortunately, the Me 210 kit had already donated its machine gun barbettes (they had gone onto an upgraded Heinkel He 115 floatplane), so that I scratched them for the Go 146. WWII bombs became the fairings, some leftover landing gear struts were used as gun barrels, and round styrene bases were used as mounts that also lift the fairings slightly off the hull. The barbettes as such look a little superficial on the slender Dinah, but they are a nice, typically German detail, über-complicated for this type of fast aircraft that probably would have more benefited from leaving them away altogether to save weight and drag.

The (typically German) 300 l drop tanks come from Hobby Boss Bf 109s and each received four short attachment struts, made from styrene profile material, so that they could be stuck under the inner wings.

  

Painting and markings:

This was more complicated than expected. I wanted to apply a plausible, late German WWII livery with typical colors, but finding something that would be suited for high-altitude operations and not copy anything I had already done turned out to be challenging.

 

The paint scheme would be very light, with only low-contrast camouflage added on top. Therefore, the basis became an overall coat with RLM 76 (I used Tamiya XF-23, Light Blue, which is an excellent option). Inspired by He 177 bombers I found in literature, large blotches of a rather obscure and uncommon tone, RLM 77 “Hellgrau” were added to the flanks of fuselage, fin and engine nacelles. RLM 77 is/was a very light grey, and it was primarily used for markings like code letters on night fighters and not for camouflage. AFAIK it would later become the RAL 7035 (Lichtgrau) tone that still exists today. Humbrol 196 would have been an authentic option, but to keep the contrast to the underlying RLM 76 low I rather used XF-19 (Sky Grey) and extended the blotches under the fuselage and the nacelles, for a semi-wraparound scheme.

 

Then came the upper surfaces, everything was painted with brushes and without masks, with an intentional uneven finish. The wings and stabilizers were to receive a slightly darker camouflage in the form of RLM 02 and 75 splotches (with Tamiya XF-22 and XF-XX as proxies) over the uniform RLM 76 base, so that the aircraft’s outlines would be broken up from above. However, after first tests I found this did not look convincing, the RLM 76 was very prominent and bluish, so that I rather gave the upper wings and the spine a semi-translucent but continuous coat of paint, with the underlying RLM 76 just showing through here and there – much better. At this stage I added the decals (see below), but now found the upper surfaces to look too uniform and somewhat dark, so that, as a final measure, I added a meander pattern with RLM 77 (again XF-19) to the wings. This not only looked good and very “German”, it lightened the cammo and also helped to break the aircraft’s lines up. Some light panel shading to the uniform undersides, black ink and grinded graphite were used for weathering, but the effects are very soft.

 

Interior surfaces (cockpit and landing gear wells) became late-war style RAL 7021 Schwarzgrau (Humbrol 67), the landing gear struts were painted in RLM 02, this time Revell 45 was used. The propeller blades were painted in a very dark mix of green and black, the spinners became black with simple white spirals – the only detail with a high contrast on this aircraft.

 

The markings of this aircraft are minimal. Balkenkreuz markings only consisting of outlines were used, another typical late-war practice and for a low-visibility look/effect. They were taken from an Academy Fw 190 D. On the fuselage, the gun barbettes caused some headaches, because they take up a lot of space and made the application of a standard Luftwaffe code almost impossible. Consequently, the fuselage Balkenkreuze were placed ahead of the barbettes, partly disrupted by the observer’s lower side windows, while the tactical code became separated by the guns. At starboard the code even had to be reversed - not correct, but a pragmatic solution.

The model/aircraft belongs to a fictional unit, its code “P3” in front of the fuselage Balkenkreuz has no real-world reference and was executed in small letters, a typical late WWII measure. This part of the code was done with small, black 2 mm letters. A fictional unit badge, depicting a running greyhound, was added under the cockpit. It actually belongs to a German tank unit.

The “KN” part of the code, including the Ks on the nose, came from an Airfix Ju 87 B sheet. As an aircraft belonging to the 5th squadron within the unit’s 2nd group, the 4th letter in the code became “N”, while the 3rd letter “K” denotes the individual aircraft. The color code associated with a 5th squadron was red, incorporated on the aircraft as a thin red outline around the individual aircraft letter (another late-war low-contrast measure). To provide a little visual excitement, small red Ks were added to the nose, too, to make thew aircraft easy to identify when parked at the flight line.

Since this aircraft would operate over the Western front from German home ground, no further ID/theatre markings like fuselage or wing bands or wingtips in yellow or white, etc. were added. This, together with the lack of visible red as squadron code, results in a rather dry look, but that’s intentional.

After some exhaust and oil stains with graphite and Tamiya “Smoke”, a coat of acrylic matt varnish finally sealed the model and a wire antenna, made from heated sprue material, was added.

  

Well, an exotic what-if idea, but I really like how this conversion turned out, even though the livery evolved in a different way from what I had initially in mind. The Ki-46 was already an elegant aircraft, especially the Ki-46-III with its teardrop-shaped nose section. But, with the smaller, streamlined inline engines instead of the radials, this iteration looks even better and faster. It reminds a little of the D.H. Hornet? The gun barbettes are a nice “German” detail, and the makeshift high-altitude paint scheme adds to the obscure impression of the model. A really nice sister ship for the Go 146 A-0 build from 2015.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Georgian Air Force and Air Defense Division (თავდაცვის ძალების ავიაციისა და საჰაერო თავდაცვის სარდლობა; tavdatsvis dzalebis aviatsiisa da sahaero tavdatsvis sardloba) was established on January 1, 1992, and in September the Georgian Air Force conducted its first combat flight during the separatist war in Abkhazia. On August 18, 1998, the two divisions were unified in a joint command structure and renamed the Georgian Air Force.

In 2010, the Georgian Air Force was abolished as a separate branch and incorporated into the Georgian Land Forces as Air and Air Defense sections. By that time, the equipment – primarily consisting of Eastern Bloc aircraft inherited from the Soviet Union after the country’s dissolution – was totally outdated, the most potent aircraft were a dozen Suchoj Su-25 attack aircraft and a handful of MiG-21U trainers.

 

In order to rejuvenate the air arm, Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing (TAM), also known as JSC Tbilaviamsheni and formerly known as 31st aviation factory, started a modernization program for the Su-25, for the domestic forces but also for export customers. TAM had a long tradition of aircraft production within the Soviet Union. In the 1950s the factory started the production of Mikoyan's MiG-15 and later, the MiG-17 fighter aircraft. In 1957 Tbilisi Aircraft State Association built the MiG-21 two-seater fighter-trainer aircraft and its various derivative aircraft, continuing the MiG-21 production for about 25 years. At the same time the company was manufacturing the K-10 air-to-surface guided missile. Furthermore, the first Sukhoi Su-25 (known in the West as the "Frogfoot") close support aircraft took its maiden voyage from the runway of 31st aviation factory. Since then, more than 800 SU-25s had been delivered to customers worldwide. From the first SU-25 to the 1990s, JSC Tbilaviamsheni was the only manufacturer of this aircraft, and even after the fall of the Soviet Union the production lines were still intact and spares for more than fifty complete aircraft available. Along with the SU-25 aircraft 31st aviation factory also launched large-scale production of air-to-air R-60 and R-73 IR guided missiles, a production effort that built over 6,000 missiles a year and that lasted until the early 1990s. From 1996 to 1998 the factory also produced Su-25U two-seaters.

 

In 2001 the factory started, in partnership with Elbit Systems of Israel, upgrading basic Su-25 airframes to the Su-25KM “Scorpion” variant. This was just a technical update, however, intended for former Su-25 export customers who would upgrade their less potent Su-25K export aircraft with modern avionics. The prototype aircraft made its maiden flight on 18 April 2001 at Tbilisi in full Georgian Air Force markings. The aircraft used a standard Su-25 airframe, enhanced with advanced avionics including a glass cockpit, digital map generator, helmet-mounted display, computerized weapons system, complete mission pre-plan capability, and fully redundant backup modes. Performance enhancements included a highly accurate navigation system, pinpoint weapon delivery systems, all-weather and day/night performance, NATO compatibility, state-of-the art safety and survivability features, and advanced onboard debriefing capabilities complying with international requirements. The Su-25KM had the ability to use NATO-standard Mark 82 and Mark 83 laser-guided bombs and new air-to-air missiles, the short-range Vympel R-73. This upgrade extended service life of the Su-25 airframes for another decade.

There were, however, not many customers. Manufacturing was eventually stopped at the end of 2010, after Georgian air forces have been permanently dismissed and abolished. By that time, approximately 12 Scorpions had been produced, but the Georgian Air Force still used the basic models of Su-25 because of high cost of Su-25KM and because it was destined mainly for export. According to unofficial sources several Scorpions had been transferred to Turkmenistan as part of a trade deal.

 

In the meantime, another, more ambitious project took shape at Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing, too: With the help of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) the company started the development of a completely new attack aircraft, the TAM-1 “Gvelgeslas” (გველგესლას, Viper). It heavily relied on the year-long experience gathered with Su-25 production at Tblisi and on the tools at hand, but it was eventually a completely new aircraft – looking like a crossbreed between the Su-25 and the American A-10 with a T-tail.

 

This new layout had become necessary because the aircraft was to be powered by more modern, less noisy and more fuel-efficient Rolls Royce AE 3012 turbofan engines - which were originally intended to power the stillborn Yakovlev Yak-77 twin-engine business jet for up to 32 passengers, a slightly derated variant of the GMA 3012 with a 44 in diameter (112 cm) fan and procured via IAI from the United States through the company’s connection with Gulfstream Aerospace. Their larger diameter (the Su-25’s original Soyuz/Tumansky R-195 turbojets had a diameter of 109,5 cm/43.1 in) precluded the use of the former integral engine nacelles along the fuselage. To keep good ground clearance against FOD and to protect them from small arms fire, the engine layout was completely re-arranged. The fuselage was streamlined, and its internal structure was totally changed. The wings moved into a low position. The wings’ planform was almost identical to the Su-25’s, together with the characteristic tip-mounted “crocodile” air brakes. Just the leading edge inside of the “dogteeth” and the wing roots were re-designed, the latter because of the missing former engine nacelles. This resulted in a slightly increased net area, the original wingspan was retained. The bigger turbofans were then mounted in separate pods on short pylons along the rear fuselage, partly protected from below by the wings. Due to the jet efflux and the engines’ proximity to the stabilizers, these were re-located to the top of a deeper, reinforced fin for a T-tail arrangement.

 

Since the Su-25’s engine bays were now gone, the main landing gear had to be completely re-designed. Retracting them into the fuselage or into the relatively thin wings was not possible, TAM engineers settled upon a design that was very similar to the A-10: the aircraft received streamlined fairings, attached to the wings’ main spar, and positioned under the wings’ leading edges. The main legs were only semi-retractable; in flight, the wheels partly protruded from the fairings, but that hardly mattered from an aerodynamic point of view at the TAM-1’s subsonic operational speed. As a bonus they could still be used while retracted during emergency landings, improving the aircraft’s crash survivability.

 

Most flight and weapon avionics were procured from or via Elbit, including the Su-25KT’s modernized “glass cockpit”, and the TAM-1’s NATO compatibility was enhanced to appeal to a wider international export market. Beyond a total of eleven hardpoints under the wings and the fuselage for an external ordnance of up to 4.500 kg (9.900 lb), the TAM-1 was furthermore armed with an internal gun. Due to procurement issues, however, the Su-25’s original twin-barrel GSh-30-2 was replaced with an Oerlikon KDA 35mm cannon – a modern variant of the same cannon used in the German Gepard anti-aircraft tank, adapted to the use in an aircraft with a light-weight gun carriage. The KDA gun fired with a muzzle velocity of 1,440 m/s (4,700 ft/s) and a range of 5.500m, its rate of fire was typically 550 RPM. For the TAM-1, a unique feature from the SPAAG installation was adopted: the gun had two magazines, one with space for 200 rounds and another, smaller one for 50. The magazines could be filled with different types of ammunition, and the pilot was able select between them with a simple switch, adapting to the combat situation. Typical ammunition types were armor-piercing FAPDS rounds against hardened ground targets like tanks, and high explosive shells against soft ground targets and aircraft or helicopters, in a 3:1 ratio. Other ammunition types were available, too, and only 200 rounds were typically carried for balance reasons.

 

The TAM-1’s avionics included a SAGEM ULISS 81 INS, a Thomson-CSF VE-110 HUD, a TMV630 laser rangefinder in a modified nose and a TRT AHV 9 radio altimeter, with all avionics linked through a digital MIL-STD-1553B data bus and a modern “glass cockpit”. A HUD was standard, but an Elbit Systems DASH III HMD could be used by the pilot, too. The DASH GEN III was a wholly embedded design, closely integrated with the aircraft's weapon system, where the complete optical and position sensing coil package was built within the helmet (either the USAF standard HGU-55/P or the Israeli standard HGU-22/P), using a spherical visor to provide a collimated image to the pilot. A quick-disconnect wire powered the display and carried video drive signals to the helmet's Cathode Ray Tube (CRT).

 

The TAM-1’s development was long and protracted, though, primarily due to lack of resources and the fact that the Georgian air force was in an almost comatose state for several years, so that the potential prime customer for the TAM-1 was not officially available. However, the first TAM-1 prototype eventually made its maiden flight in September 2017. This was just in time, because the Georgian Air Force had formally been re-established in 2016, with plans for a major modernization and procurement program. Under the leadership of Georgian Minister of Defense Irakli Garibashvili the Air Force was re-prioritized and aircraft owned by the Georgian Air Force were being modernized and re-serviced after they were left abandoned for 4 years. This program lasted until 2020. In order to become more independent from foreign sources and support its domestic aircraft industry, the Georgian Air Force eventually ordered eight TAM-1s as Su-25K replacements, which would operate alongside a handful of modernized Su-25KMs from national stock. In the meantime, the new type also attained interest from abroad, e. g. from Bulgaria, the Congo and Cyprus. The IDF thoroughly tested two early production TAM-1s of the Georgian Air Force in 2018, too.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 15.53 m (50 ft 11 in), including pitot

Wingspan: 14.36 m (47 ft 1 in)

Height: 4.8 m (15 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 35.2 m² (378 sq ft)

Empty weight: 9,800 kg (21,605 lb)

Gross weight: 14,440 kg (31,835 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 19,300 kg (42,549 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce AE 3012 turbofans with 44.1 kN (9,920 lbf) thrust each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 975 km/h (606 mph, 526 kn, Mach 0.79)

Range: 1.000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi) with internal fuel, clean

Combat range: 750 km (470 mi, 400 nmi) at sea level with 4.500 kg (9,911 lb) of ordnance,

incl. two external fuel tanks

Service ceiling: 7.800 m (25,550 ft)

g limits: +6.5

Rate of climb: 58 m/s (11,400 ft/min)

 

Armament:

1× 35 mm (1.38 in) Oerlikon KDA cannon with 200 rds in two magazines

under the lower forward fuselage, offset to port side.

11× hardpoints with a capacity of up to 4.500 kg (9,911 lb) of external stores

  

The kit and its assembly:

This rather rigorous conversion had been on my project list for many years, and with the “Gunships” group build at whatifmodellers.com in late 2021 I eventually gathered my mojo to tackle it. The ingredients had already been procured long ago, but there are ideas that make you think twice before you take action…

 

This build was somewhat inspired by a CG rendition of a modified Su-25 that I came across while doing online search for potential ideas, running under the moniker “Su-125”, apparently created by someone called “Bispro” and published at DeviantArt in 2010; check this: (www.deviantart.com/bispro/art/Sukhoi-Su-125-Foghorn-15043...). The rendition shows a Su-25 with its engines re-located to the rear fuselage in separate nacelles, much like an A-10, plus a T-tail. However, as many photoshopped aircraft, the shown concept had IMHO some flaws. Where would a landing gear go, as the Su-125 still had shoulder wings? The engines’ position and size also looked fishy to me, quite small/narrow and very far high and back – I had doubts concerning the center of gravity. Nevertheless, I liked the idea, and the idea of an “A-10-esque remix” of the classic Frogfoot was born.

 

This idea was fueled even further when I found out that the Hobbycraft kit lends itself to such a conversion. The kit itself is not a brilliant Su-25 rendition, there are certainly better models of the aircraft in 1:72. However, what spoke for the kit as whiffing fodder was/is the fact that it is quite cheap (righteously so!) and AFAIK the only offering that comes with separate engine nacelles. These are attached to a completely independent central fuselage, and this avoids massive bodywork that would be necessary (if possible at all) with more conventional kits of this aircraft.

Another beneficial design feature is that the wing roots are an integral part of the original engine nacelles, forming their top side up to the fuselage spine. Through this, the original wingspan could be retained even without the nacelles, no wing extension would be necessary to retain the original proportions.

 

Work started with the central fuselage and the cockpit tub, which received a different (better) armored ejection seat and a pilot figure; the canopy remained unmodified and closed, because representing the model with an open cockpit would have required additional major body work on the spinal area behind the canopy. Inside, a new dashboard (from an Italeri BAe Hawk) was added, too – the original instrument panel is just a flat front bulkhead, there’s no space for the pilot to place the legs underneath the dashboard!

 

In parallel, the fin underwent major surgery. I initially considered an A-10-ish twin tail, but the Su-25’s high “tail stinger” prevented its implementation: the jet efflux would come very close to the tail surfaces. So, I went for something similar to the “Su-125” layout.

Mounting the OOB stabilizers to the fin was challenging, though. The fin lost its di-electric tip fairing, and it was cut into two sections, so that the tip would become long enough to match the stabilizers. A lucky find in the scrap box was a leftover tail tip from a Matchbox Blackburn Buccaneer, already shortened from a former, stillborn project: it had now the perfect length to take the Su-25 stabilizers! To make it fit on the fin, an 8mm deep section was inserted, in the form of a simple 1.5mm styrene sheet strip. Once dry, the surface was re-built with several PSR layers. Since it would sit further back on the new aircraft’s tail, the stinger with a RHAWS sensor was shortened.

 

On the fuselage, the attachment points for the wings and the engine nacelles were PSRed away and the front section filled with lots of lead beads, hoping that it would be enough to keep the model’s nose down.

 

Even though the wings had a proper span for a re-location into a low position, they still needed some attention: at the roots, there’s a ~1cm wide section without sweep (the area which would normally cover the original engine nacelles’ tops). This was mended through triangular 1.5 mm styrene wedges that extended the leading-edge sweep, roughly cut into shape once attached and later PSRed into the wings’ surfaces

 

The next construction site were the new landing gear attachment points. This had caused some serious headaches – where do you place and stow it? With new, low wings settled, the wings were the only logical place. But the wings were too thin to suitably take the retracted wheels, and, following the idea of a retrofitted existing design, I decided to adopt the A-10’s solution of nacelles into which the landing gear retracts forward, with the wheels still partly showing. This layout option appears quite plausible, since it would be a “graft-on” solution, and it also has the benefit of leaving lots of space for underwing stores, since the hardpoints’ position had to be modified now, too.

I was lucky to have a pair of A-10 landing gear nacelles at hand, left over from a wrecked Matchbox model from childhood time (the parts are probably 35 years old!). They were simply cut out, glued to the Su-25 wings and PSRed into shape. The result looked really good!

 

At this point I had to decide the model’s overall layout – where to place the wings, the tail and the new engine nacelles. The latter were not 1:72 A-10 transplants. I had some spare engine pods from the aforementioned Matchbox wreck, but these looked too rough and toylike for my taste. They were furthermore too bulky for the Su-25, which is markedly smaller than an A-10, so I had to look elsewhere. As a neat alternative for this project, I had already procured many moons ago a set of 1:144 resin PS-90A engines from a Russian company called “A.M.U.R. Reaver”, originally intended for a Tu-204 airliner or an Il-76 transport aircraft. These turbofan nacelles not only look very much like A-10 nacelles, just a bit smaller and more elegant, they are among the best resin aftermarket parts I have ever encountered: almost no flash, crisp molding, no bubbles, and perfect fit of the parts – WOW!

With these three elements at hand I was able to define the wings’ position, based on the tail, and from that the nacelles’ location, relative to the wings and the fin.

 

The next challenge: how to attach the new engines to the fuselage? The PS-90A engines came without pylons, so I had to improvise. I eventually found suitable pylons in the form of parts from F-14A underwing missile pylons, left over from an Italeri kit. Some major tailoring was necessary to find a proper position on the nacelles and on the fuselage, and PSRing these parts turned out to be quite difficult because of the tight and labyrinthine space.

 

When the engines were in place, work shifted towards the model’s underside. The landing gear was fully replaced. I initially wanted to retain the front wheel leg and the main wheels but found that the low wings would not allow a good ground clearance for underwing stores and re-arming the aircraft, a slightly taller solution was necessary. I eventually found a complete landing gear set in the scrap box, even though I am not certain to which aircraft it once belonged? I guess that the front wheel came from a Hasegawa RA-5C Vigilante, while the main gear and the wheels once belonged to an Italeri F-14A, alle struts were slightly shortened. The resulting stance is still a bit stalky, but an A-10 is also quite tall – this is just not so obvious because of the aircraft’s sheer size.

 

Due to the low wings and the landing gear pods, the Su-25’s hardpoints had to be re-arranged, and this eventually led to a layout very similar to the A-10. I gave the aircraft a pair of pylons inside of the pods, plus three hardpoints under the fuselage, even though all of these would only be used when slim ordnance was carried. I just fitted the outer pair. Outside of the landing gear fairings there would have been enough space for the Frogfoot’s original four outer for pylons, but I found this to be a little too much. So I gave it “just” three, with more space between them.

The respective ordnance is a mix for a CAS mission with dedicated and occasional targets. It consists of:

- Drop tanks under the inner wings (left over from a Bilek Su-17/22 kit)

- A pair of B-8M1 FFAR pods under the fuselage (from a vintage Mastercraft USSR weapon set)

- Two MERs with four 200 kg bombs each, mounted on the pylons outside of the landing gear (the odd MERs came from a Special Hobby IDF SMB-2 Super Mystère kit, the bombs are actually 1:100 USAF 750 lb bombs from a Tamiya F-105 Thunderchief in that scale)

- Four CBU-100 Rockeye Mk. II cluster bombs on the outer stations (from two Italeri USA/NATO weapon sets, each only offers a pair of these)

Yes, it’s a mix of Russian and NATO ordnance – but, like the real Georgian Su-25KM “Scorpion” upgrade, the TAM-1 would certainly be able to carry the same or even a wider mix, thanks to modified bomb racks and wirings. Esp. “dumb” weapons, which do not call for special targeting and guidance avionics, are qualified.

The gun under the nose was replaced with a piece from a hollow steel needle.

  

Painting and markings:

Nothing unusual here. I considered some more “exotic” options, but eventually settled for a “conservative” Soviet/Russian-style four-tone tactical camouflage, something that “normal” Su-25s would carry, too.

The disruptive pattern was adapted from a Macedonian Frogfoot but underwent some changes due to the T-tail and the engine nacelles. The basic tones were Humbrol 119 (RAF Light Earth), 150 (Forest Green), 195 (Chrome Oxide Green, RAL 6020) and 98 (Chocolate) on the upper surfaces and RLM78 from (Modelmaster #2087) from below, with a relatively low waterline, due to the low-set wings.

As usual, the model received a light black ink washing and some post-shading – especially on the hull and on the fin, where many details had either disappeared under PSR or were simply not there at all.

 

The landing gear and the lower areas of the cockpit were painted in light grey (Humbrol 64), while the upper cockpit sections were painted with bright turquoise (Modelmaster #2135). The wheel hubs were painted in bright green (Humbrol 101), while some di-electric fairings received a slightly less intense tone (Humbrol 2). A few of these flat fairings on the hull were furthermore created with green decal sheet material (from TL Modellbau) to avoid masking and corrections with paint.

 

The tactical markings became minimal, matching the look of late Georgian Su-25s. The roundels came from a Balkan Models Frogfoot sheet. The “07” was taken from a Blue Rider decal sheet, it actually belongs to a Lithuanian An-2. Some white stencils from generic MiG-21 and Mi-8 Begemot sheets were added, too, and some small markings were just painted onto the hull with yellow.

 

Some soot stains around the jet nozzles and the gun were added with graphite, and finally the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish.

  

A major bodywork project – and it’s weird that this is basically just a conversion of a stock kit and no kitbashing. A true Frogfoot remix! The new engines were the biggest “outsourced” addition, the A-10 landing gear fairings were a lucky find in the scrap box, and the rest is quite generic and could have looked differently. The result is impressive and balanced, though, the fictional TAM-1 looks quite plausible. The landing gear turned out to be a bit tall and stalky, though, making the aircraft look smaller on the ground than it actually is – but I left it that way.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on authentic facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The English Electric Skyspark was a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It remains the only UK-designed-and-built fighter capable of Mach 2. The Skyspark was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric, which was later merged into the newly-formed British Aircraft Corporation. Later the type was marketed as the BAC Skyspark.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 program. W.E.W. "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, was a keen early proponent of Britain's need to develop a supersonic fighter aircraft. In 1947, Petter approached the Ministry of Supply (MoS) with his proposal, and in response Specification ER.103 was issued for a single research aircraft, which was to be capable of flight at Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with F W "Freddie" Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, it had a 40° swept wing to keep the leading edge clear of the Mach cone. To mount enough power into the airframe, two engines were installed, in an unusual, stacked layout and with a high tailplane This proposal was submitted in November 1948, and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mock-up.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance. To achieve Mach 2 the wing sweep was increased to 60° with the ailerons moved to the wingtips. In late 1949, low-speed wind tunnel tests showed that a vortex was generated by the wing which caused a large downwash on the initial high tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1. In 1949, the Ministry of Supply had issued Specification F23/49, which expanded upon the scope of ER103 to include fighter-level manoeuvring. On 1 April 1950, English Electric received a contract for two flying airframes, as well as one static airframe, designated P.1.

 

The Royal Aircraft Establishment disagreed with Petter's choice of sweep angle (60 degrees) and the stacked engine layout, as well as the low tailplane position, was considered to be dangerous, too. To assess the effects of wing sweep and tailplane position on the stability and control of Petter's design Short Brothers were issued a contract, by the Ministry of Supply, to produce the Short SB.5 in mid-1950. This was a low-speed research aircraft that could test sweep angles from 50 to 69 degrees and tailplane positions high or low. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one. The proposed 60-degree wing sweep was retained, but the stacked engines had to give way to a more conventional configuration with two engines placed side-by-side in the tail, but still breathing through a mutual nose air intake.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury. These aircraft had been assigned the aircraft serials WG760, WG763, and WG765 (the structural test airframe). The prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, as the selected Rolls-Royce Avon engines had fallen behind schedule due to their own development problems. Since there was not much space in the fuselage for fuel, the thin wings became the primary fuel tanks and since they also provided space for the stowed main undercarriage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance. The narrow tires housed in the thin wings rapidly wore out if there was any crosswind component during take-off or landing. Outwardly, the prototypes looked very much like the production series, but they were distinguished by the rounded-triangular air intake with no center-body at the nose, short fin, and lack of operational equipment.

 

On 9 June 1952, it was decided that there would be a second phase of prototypes built to develop the aircraft toward achieving Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h); these were designated P.1B while the initial three prototypes were retroactively reclassified as P.1A. P.1B was a significant improvement on P.1A. While it was similar in aerodynamics, structure and control systems, it incorporated extensive alterations to the forward fuselage, reheated Rolls Royce Avon R24R engines, a conical center body inlet cone, variable nozzle reheat and provision for weapons systems integrated with the ADC and AI.23 radar. Three P.1B prototypes were built, assigned serials XA847, XA853 and XA856.

 

In May 1954, WG760 and its support equipment were moved to RAF Boscombe Down for pre-flight ground taxi trials; on the morning of 4 August 1954, WG760 flew for the first time from Boscombe Down. One week later, WG760 officially achieved supersonic flight for the first time, having exceeded the speed of sound during its third flight. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was plagued by directional stability problems and a dismal performance: Transonic drag was much higher than expected, and the aircraft was limited to Mach 0.98 (i.e. subsonic), with a ceiling of just 48,000 ft (14,630 m), far below the requirements.

 

To solve the problem and save the P.1, Petter embarked on a major redesign, incorporating the recently discovered area rule, while at the same time simplifying production and maintenance. The redesign entailed a new, narrower canopy, a revised air intake, a pair of stabilizing fins under the rear fuselage, and a shallow ventral fairing at the wings’ trailing edge that not only reduced the drag coefficient along the wing/fuselage intersection, it also provided space for additional fuel.

On 4 April 1957 the modified P.1B (XA847) made the first flight, immediately exceeding Mach 1. During the early flight trials of the P.1B, speeds in excess of 1,000 mph were achieved daily.

In late October 1958, the plane was officially presented. The event was celebrated in traditional style in a hangar at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough, with the prototype XA847 having the name ‘Skyspark’ freshly painted on the nose in front of the RAF Roundel, which almost covered it. A bottle of champagne was put beside the nose on a special rig which allowed the bottle to safely be smashed against the side of the aircraft.

On 25 November 1958 the P.1B XA847 reached Mach 2 for the first time. This made it the second Western European aircraft to reach Mach 2, the first one being the French Dassault Mirage III just over a month earlier on 24 October 1958

 

The first operational Skyspark, designated Skyspark F.1, was designed as a pure interceptor to defend the V Force airfields in conjunction with the "last ditch" Bristol Bloodhound missiles located either at the bomber airfield, e.g. at RAF Marham, or at dedicated missile sites near to the airfield, e.g. at RAF Woodhall Spa near the Vulcan station RAF Coningsby. The bomber airfields, along with the dispersal airfields, would be the highest priority targets in the UK for enemy nuclear weapons. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range – originally a radius of operation of only 150 miles (240 km) from the V bomber airfields was specified – and endurance. Armament consisted of a pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit, and two pylons for IR-guided de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles were added to the lower fuselage flanks. These hardpoints could, alternatively, carry pods with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets. The Ferranti AI.23 onboard radar provided missile guidance and ranging, as well as search and track functions.

 

The next two Skyspark variants, the Skyspark F.1A and F.2, incorporated relatively minor design changes, but for the next variant, the Skyspark F.3, they were more extensive: The F.3 had higher thrust Rolls-Royce Avon 301R engines, a larger squared-off fin that improved directional stability at high speed further and a strengthened inlet cone allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were all limited to Mach 1.7 (2,083 km/h). An upgraded A.I.23B radar and new, radar-guided Red Top missiles offered a forward hemisphere attack capability, even though additional electronics meant that the ADEN guns had to be deleted – but they were not popular in their position in front of the windscreen, because the muzzle flash blinded the pilot upon firing. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Skyspark yet, but this came at a steep price: higher fuel consumption, resulting in even shorter range. From this basis, a conversion trainer with a side-by-side cockpit, the T.4, was created.

 

The next interceptor variant was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3's shortcomings, the F.3A. The F.3A introduced two major improvements: a larger, non-jettisonable, 610-imperial-gallon (2,800 L) ventral fuel tank, resulting in a much deeper and longer belly fairing, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge. The conically cambered wing improved manoeuvrability, especially at higher altitudes, and it offered space for a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel by 716 imperial gallons (3,260 L). The enlarged ventral tank not only nearly doubled available fuel, it also provided space at its front end for a re-instated pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon with 120 RPG. Alternatively, a retractable pack with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets could be installed, or a set of cameras for reconnaissance missions. The F.3A also introduced an improved A.I.23B radar and the new IR-guided Red Top missile, which was much faster and had greater range and manoeuvrability than the Firestreak. Its improved infrared seeker enabled a wider range of engagement angles and offered a forward hemisphere attack capability that would allow the Skyspark to attack even faster bombers (like the new, supersonic Tupolev T-22 Blinder) through a collision-course approach.

Wings and the new belly tank were also immediately incorporated in a second trainer variant, the T.5.

 

The ultimate variant, the Skyspark F.6, was nearly identical to the F.3A, with the exception that it could carry two additional 260-imperial-gallon (1,200 L) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability, even though their supersonic drag was so high that the extra fuel would only marginally raise the aircraft’s range when flying beyond the sound barrier for extended periods.

 

Finally, there was the Skyspark F.2A; it was an early production F.2 upgraded with the new cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 imperial gallons (2,800 L) ventral tank. However, the F.2A retained the old AI.23 radar, the IR-guided Firestreak missile and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Skysparks, it had the longest tactical range of all variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over West Germany.

 

The first Skysparks to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, joining the Air Fighting Development Squadron (AFDS) of the Central Fighter Establishment, where they were used to clear the Skyspark for entry into service. The production Skyspark F.1 entered service with the AFDS in May 1960, allowing the unit to take part in the air defence exercise "Yeoman" later that month. The Skyspark F.1 entered frontline squadron service with 74 Squadron at Coltishall from 11 July 1960. This made the Skyspark the second Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the second fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe (the first one in both categories being the Swedish Saab 35 Draken on 8 March 1960 four months earlier).

 

The aircraft's radar and missiles proved to be effective, and pilots reported that the Skyspark was easy to fly. However, in the first few months of operation the aircraft's serviceability was extremely poor. This was due to the complexity of the aircraft systems and shortages of spares and ground support equipment. Even when the Skyspark was not grounded by technical faults, the RAF initially struggled to get more than 20 flying hours per aircraft per month compared with the 40 flying hours that English Electric believed could be achieved with proper support. In spite of these concerns, within six months of the Skyspark entering service, 74 Squadron was able to achieve 100 flying hours per aircraft.

 

Deliveries of the slightly improved Skyspark F.1A, with revised avionics and provision for an air-to-air refueling probe, allowed two more squadrons, 56 and 111 Squadron, both based at RAF Wattisham, to convert to the Skyspark in 1960–1961. The Skyspark F.1 was only ordered in limited numbers and served only for a short time; nonetheless, it was viewed as a significant step forward in Britain's air defence capabilities. Following their replacement from frontline duties by the introduction of successively improved Skyspark variants, the remaining F.1 aircraft were employed by the Skyspark Conversion Squadron.

The improved F.2 entered service with 19 Squadron at the end of 1962 and 92 Squadron in early 1963. Conversion of these two squadrons was aided by the of the two-seat T.4 and T.5 trainers (based on the F.3 and F.3A/F.6 fighters), which entered service with the Skyspark Conversion Squadron (later renamed 226 Operational Conversion Unit) in June 1962. While the OCU was the major user of the two-seater, small numbers were also allocated to the front-line fighter squadrons. More F.2s were produced than there were available squadron slots, so later production aircraft were stored for years before being used operationally; some of these Skyspark F.2s were converted to F.2As.

 

The F.3, with more powerful engines and the new Red Top missile was expected to be the definitive Skyspark, and at one time it was planned to equip ten squadrons, with the remaining two squadrons retaining the F.2. However, the F.3 also had only a short operational life and was withdrawn from service early due to defence cutbacks and the introduction of the even more capable and longer-range F.6, some of which were converted F.3s.

 

The introduction of the F.3 and F.6 allowed the RAF to progressively reequip squadrons operating aircraft such as the subsonic Gloster Javelin and retire these types during the mid-1960s. During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Skyspark's range and firepower shortcomings became increasingly apparent. The transfer of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs from Royal Navy service enabled these much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAF's interceptor force, alongside those withdrawn from Germany as they were replaced by SEPECAT Jaguars in the ground attack role.

The Skyspark's direct replacement was the Tornado F.3, an interceptor variant of the Panavia Tornado. The Tornado featured several advantages over the Skyspark, including far larger weapons load and considerably more advanced avionics. Skysparks were slowly phased out of service between 1974 and 1988, even though they lasted longer than expected because the definitive Tornado F.3 went through serious teething troubles and its service introduction was delayed several times. In their final years, the Skysparks’ airframes required considerable maintenance to keep them airworthy due to the sheer number of accumulated flight hours.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 51 ft 2 in (15,62 m) fuselage only

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14,092 kg) with armament and no fuel

Gross weight: 41,076 lb (18,632 kg) with two Red Tops, ammunition, and internal fuel

Max. takeoff weight: 45,750 lb (20,752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojet engines,

12,690 lbf (56.4 kN) thrust each dry, 16,360 lbf (72.8 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph+ at 40,000 ft)

Range: 738 nmi (849 mi, 1,367 km)

Combat range: 135 nmi (155 mi, 250 km) supersonic intercept radius

Range: 800 nmi (920 mi, 1,500 km) with internal fuel

1,100 nmi (1,300 mi; 2,000 km) with external overwing tanks

Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

Zoom ceiling: 70,000 ft (21,000 m)

Rate of climb: 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s) sustained to 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

Time to altitude: 2.8 min to 36,000 ft (11,000 m)

Wing loading: 76 lb/sq ft (370 kg/m²) with two AIM-9 and 1/2 fuel

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) ADEN cannon with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage

2× forward fuselage hardpoints for a single Firestreak or Red Top AAM each

2× overwing pylon stations for 2.000 lb (907 kg each)

for 260 imp gal (310 US gal; 1,200 l) ferry tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was a submission to the “Hunter, Lightning, Canberra” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and one of my personal ultimate challenges – a project that you think about very often, but the you put the thought back into its box when you realize that turning this idea into hardware will be a VERY tedious, complex and work-intensive task. But the thematic group build was the perfect occasion to eventually tackle the idea of a model of a “side-by-side engine BAC Lightning”, a.k.a. “Flatning”, as a rather conservative alternative to the real aircraft’s unique and unusual design with stacked engines in the fuselage, which brought a multitude of other design consequences that led to a really unique aircraft.

 

And it sound so simple: take a Lightning, just change the tail section. But it’s not that simple, because the whole fuselage shape would be different, resulting in less depth, the wings have to be attached somewhere and somehow, the landing gear might have to be adjusted/shortened, and how the fuselage diameter shape changes along the hull, so that you get a more or less smooth shape, was also totally uncertain!

 

Initially I considered a MiG Ye-152 as a body donor, but that was rejected due to the sheer price of the only available kit (ModelSvit). A Chinese Shenyang J-8I would also have been ideal – but there’s not 1:72 kit of this aircraft around, just of its successor with side intakes, a 1:72 J-8II from trumpeter.

I eventually decided to keep costs low, and I settled for the shaggy PM Model Su-15 (marketed as Su-21) “Flagon” as main body donor: it’s cheap, the engines have a good size for Avons and the pen nib fairing has a certain retro touch that goes well with the Lightning’s Fifties design.

The rest of this "Flatning" came from a Hasegawa 1:72 BAC Lightning F.6 (Revell re-boxing).

 

Massive modifications were necessary and lots of PSR. In an initial step the Flagon lost its lower wing halves, which are an integral part of the lower fuselage half. The cockpit section was cut away where the intake ducts begin. The Lightning had its belly tank removed (set aside for a potential later re-installation), and dry-fitting and crude measures suggested that only the cockpit section from the Lightning, its spine and the separate fin would make it onto the new fuselage.

 

Integrating the parts was tough, though! The problem that caused the biggest headaches: how to create a "smooth" fuselage from the Lightning's rounded front end with a single nose intake that originally develops into a narrow, vertical hull, combined with the boxy and rather wide Flagon fuselage with large Phantom-esque intakes? My solution: taking out deep wedges from all (rather massive) hull parts along the intake ducts, bend the leftover side walls inwards and glue them into place, so that the width becomes equal with the Lightning's cockpit section. VERY crude and massive body work!

 

However, the Lightning's cockpit section for the following hull with stacked engines is much deeper than the Flagon's side-by-side layout. My initial idea was to place the cockpit section higher, but I would have had to transplant a part of the Lightning's upper fuselage (with the spine on top, too!) onto the "flat" Flagon’s back. But this would have looked VERY weird, and I'd have had to bridge the round ventral shape of the Lightning into the boxy Flagon underside, too. This was no viable option, so that the cockpit section had to be further modified; I cut away the whole ventral cockpit section, at the height of the lower intake lip. Similar to my former Austrian Hasegawa Lightning, I also cut away the vertical bulkhead directly behind the intake opening - even though I did not improve the cockpit with a better tub with side consoles. At the back end, the Flagon's jet exhausts were opened and received afterburner dummies inside as a cosmetic upgrade.

 

Massive PSR work followed all around the hull. The now-open area under the cockpit was filled with lead beads to keep the front wheel down, and I implanted a landing gear well (IIRC, it's from an Xtrakit Swift). With the fuselage literally taking shape, the wings were glued together and the locator holes for the overwing tanks filled, because they would not be mounted.

 

To mount the wings to the new hull, crude measurements suggested that wedges had to be cut away from the Lightning's wing roots to match the weird fuselage shape. They were then glued to the shoulders, right behind the cockpit due to the reduced fuselage depth. At this stage, the Lightning’s stabilizer attachment points were transplanted, so that they end up in a similar low position on the rounded Su-15 tail. Again, lots of PSR…

 

At this stage I contemplated the next essential step: belly tank or not? The “Flatning” would have worked without it, but its profile would look rather un-Lightning-ish and rather “flat”. On the other side, a conformal tank would probably look quite strange on the new wide and flat ventral fuselage...? Only experiments could yield an answer, so I glued together the leftover belly bulge parts from the Hasegawa kit and played around with it. I considered a new, wider belly tank, but I guess that this would have looked too ugly. I eventually settled upon the narrow F.6 tank and also used the section behind it with the arrestor hook. I just reduced its depth by ~2 mm, with a slight slope towards the rear because I felt (righteously) that the higher wing position would lower the model’s stance. More massive PSR followed….

 

Due to the expected poor ground clearance, the Lightning’s stabilizing ventral fins were mounted directly under the fuselage edges rather than on the belly tank. Missile pylons for Red Tops were mounted to the lower front fuselage, similar to the real arrangement, and cable fairings, scratched from styrene profiles, were added to the lower flanks, stretching the hull optically and giving more structure to the hull.

 

To my surprise, I did not have to shorten the landing gear’s main legs! The wings ended up a little higher on the fuselage than on the original Lightning, and the front wheel sits a bit further back and deeper inside of its donor well, too, so that the fuselage comes probably 2 mm closer to the ground than an OOB Lightning model. Just like on the real aircraft, ground clearance is marginal, but when the main wheels were finally in place, the model turned out to have a low but proper stance, a little F8U-ish.

  

Painting and markings:

I was uncertain about the livery for a long time – I just had already settled upon an RAF aircraft. But the model would not receive a late low-viz scheme (the Levin, my mono-engine Lightning build already had one), and no NMF, either. I was torn between an RAF Germany all-green over NMF undersides livery, but eventually went for a pretty standard RAF livery in Dark Sea Grey/Dark Green over NMF undersides, with toned-down post-war roundels.

A factor that spoke in favor of this route was a complete set of markings for an RAF 11 Squadron Lightning F.6 in such a guise on an Xtradecal set, which also featured dayglo orange makings on fin, wings and stabilizers – quite unusual, and a nice contrast detail on the otherwise very conservative livery. All stencils were taken from the OOB Revell sheet for the Lightning. Just the tactical code “F” on the tail was procured elsewhere, it comes from a Matchbox BAC Lightning’s sheet.

 

After basic painting the model received the usual black ink washing, some post-panel-shading and also a light treatment with graphite to create soot strains around the jet exhausts and the gun ports, and to emphasize the raised panel lines on the Hasegawa parts.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final bits and pieces like the landing gear and the Red Tops (taken OOB) were mounted.

  

A major effort, and I have seriously depleted my putty stocks for this build! However, the result looks less spectacular than it actually is: changing a Lightning from its literally original stacked engine layout into a more conservative side-by-side arrangement turned out to be possible, even though the outcome is not really pretty. But it works and is feasible!

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

After World War I, the German aircraft industry had several problems. German airlines were forbidden to operate multi engine aircraft and during a period all manufacturing of aircraft in Germany was banned. By 1921, some of the restrictions was lifted, civilian aircraft could be made after approval of an international control commission if they fulfilled certain requirements. To bypass these rules and to be able to make whatever aircraft they wanted several aircraft manufacturers moved abroad. In 1921, Carl Bücker handled the purchase of a reconnaissance aircraft from Caspar-Werke in Travemünde. Because they expected problems due to the rules in the peace treaty regarding the export of German fighter aircraft, Bücker explored the possibility to smuggle the parts out of Germany and assemble the aircraft in Sweden.

 

To make the purchase easier, Ernst Heinkel and Bücker started Svenska Aero in Lidingö in 1921. The contract on the aircraft was transferred from Caspar to Svenska Aero. Heinkel and some German assembly workers temporarily moved to Lidingö to assemble the aircraft. During 1922 to 1923, the company moved into a former shipyard in Skärsätra on Lidingö since the company had received additional orders from the navy's air force. The parts for those aircraft were made in Sweden by Svenska Aero but assembled by TDS. In 1928, the navy ordered four J 4 (Heinkel HD 19) as a fighter with pontoons. That delivery came to be the last licens- built aircraft by Svenska Aero. In the mid-1920s, Svenska Aero created their own design department to be able to make their own aircraft models. Sven Blomberg, earlier employed by Heinkel Flugzeugwerke, was hired as head of design. In 1930, he was joined by Anders Johan Andersson from Messerschmitt. Despite that, Svenska Aero designed and made several different models on their own.

 

One of them was the model SA-16, a direct response to the Swedish Air Force and Navy’s interest in the new dive bomber tactics, which had become popular in Germany since the mid-Thirties and had spawned several specialized aircraft, the Junkers Ju 87 being the best-known type. The Flygvapnet (Swedish Air Force) had already conducted dive bombing trials with Hawker Hart (B 4) biplanes, but only with mixed results. Diving towards the target simplified the bomb's trajectory and allowed the pilot to keep visual contact throughout the bomb run. This allowed attacks on point targets and ships, which were difficult to attack with conventional level bombers, even en masse. While accuracy was increased through bombing runs at almost vertical dive, the aircraft were not suited for this kind of operations – structurally, and through the way the bombs were dropped.

 

Therefore, Svenska Aero was tasked to develop an indigenous dedicated dive bomber, primarily intended to attack ships, and with a secondary role as reconnaissance aircraft – a mission profile quite similar to American ship-based “SB” aircraft of the time. Having learnt from the tests with the Hawker Harts, the SA-16 was a very robust monoplane, resulting in an almost archaic look. It was a single-engine all-metal cantilever monoplane with a fixed undercarriage and carried a two-person crew. The main construction material was duralumin, and the external coverings were made of duralumin sheeting, bolts and parts that were required to take heavy stress were made of steel. The wings were of so-called “double-wing” construction, which gave the SA-16 considerable advantage on take-off; even at a shallow angle, large lift forces were created through the airfoil, reducing take-off and landing runs. Retractable perforated air brakes were mounted under the wings’ leading edges. The fully closed “greenhouse cabin” offered space for a crew of two in tandem, with the pilot in front and a navigator/radio operator/observer/gunner behind. To provide the rear-facing machine gun with an increased field of fire, the stabilizers were of limited span but deeper to compensate for the loss of surface, what resulted in unusual proportions. As a side benefit, the short stabilizers had, compared with a wider standard layout, increased structural integrity. Power came from an air-cooled Bristol Mercury XII nine-cylinder radial engine with 880 hp (660 kW), built by Nohab in Sweden.

 

Internal armament consisted of two fixed forward-firing 8 mm (0.315 in) Flygplanskulspruta Ksp m/22F (M1919 Browning AN/M2) machine guns in the wings outside of the propeller disc. A third machine gun of the same type was available in the rear cockpit on a flexible mount as defensive weapon. A total of 700 kg (1,500 lb) of bombs could be carried externally. On the fuselage centerline, a swing arm could hold bombs of up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) caliber and deploy them outside of the propeller arc when released in a, additional racks under the outer wings could hold bombs of up to 250 kg (550 lb) caliber each or clusters of smaller bombs, e. g. four 50 (110 lb) or six 12 kg (26 ½ lb) bombs.

 

Flight testing of the first SA-16 prototype began on 14 August 1936. The aircraft could take off in 250 m (820 ft) and climb to 1,875 m (6,152 ft) in eight minutes with a 250 kg (550 lb) bomb load, and its cruising speed was 250 km/h (160 mph). This was less than expected, and pilots also complained that navigation and powerplant instruments were cluttered and not easy to read, especially in combat. To withstand strong forces during a dive, heavy plating, along with brackets riveted to the frame and longeron, was added to the fuselage. Despite this, pilots praised the aircraft's handling qualities and strong airframe. These problems were quickly resolved, but subsequent testing and progress still fell short of the designers’ hopes. With some refinements the machine's speed was increased to 274 km/h (170 mph) at ground level and 319 km/h 319 km/h (198 mph, 172 kn) at 3,650 m (11,980 ft), while maintaining its good handling ability.

 

Since the Swedish Air Force was in dire need for a dive bomber, the SA-16 was accepted into service as the B 9 – even though it was clear that it was only a stopgap solution on the way to a more capable light bomber with dive attack capabilities. This eventually became the Saab 17, which was initiated in 1938 as a request from the Flygvapnet to replace its fleet of dive bombers of American origin, the B 5 (Northrop A-17), the B 6 (Seversky A8V1) and the obsolete Fokker S 6 (C.Ve) sesquiplane, after the deal with Fokker to procure the two-engine twin-boom G.I as a standardized type failed due to the German invasion of the Netherlands. The B 9 dive bomber would subsequently be replaced by the more modern and capable B 17 in the long run, too, which made its first flight on 18 May 1940 and was introduced to frontline units in March 1942. Until then, 93 SA-16s had been produced between 1937 and 1939. When the B 17 became available, the slow B 9 was quickly retired from the attack role. Plans to upgrade the aircraft with a stronger 14 cylinder engine (a Piaggio P.XIbis R.C.40D with 790 kW/1,060 hp) were not carried out, as it was felt that the design lacked further development potential in an offensive role.

Because the airframes were still young and had a lot of service life ahead of them, most SA-16s were from 1941 on relegated to patrol and reconnaissance missions along the Swedish coastlines, observing ship and aircraft traffic in the Baltic Sea and undertaking rescue missions with droppable life rafts. For long-range missions, the forked ventral swing arm was replaced with a fixed plumbed pylon for an external 682 liters (150 Imp. gal.) auxiliary tank that more than doubled the aircraft’s internal fuel capacity of 582 liters, giving it an endurance of around 8 hours. In many cases, the machine guns on these aircraft were removed to save weight. In this configuration the SA-16 was re-designated S 9 (“S” for Spaning) and the machines served in their naval observation and SAR role well into the Fifties, when the last SA-16s were retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: two, pilot and observer

Length: 9,58 m (31 ft 11 in)

Wingspan: 10,67 m (34 ft 11 in)

Height: 3,82 m (12 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 30.2 m² (325 sq ft)

Empty weight: 2,905 kg (6,404 lb)

Gross weight: 4,245 kg (9,359 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 4,853 kg (10,700 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Bristol Mercury XII nine-cylinder radial engine with 880 hp (660 kW),

driving a three-bladed variable pitch metal propeller

 

u>Performance:

Maximum speed: 319 km/h (198 mph, 172 kn) at 3,650 m (11,980 ft)

274 km/h (170 mph; 148 kn) at sea level

299 km/h (186 mph; 161 kn) at 2,000 m (6,600 ft)

308 km/h (191 mph; 166 kn) at 5,000 m (16,000 ft)

Stall speed: 110 km/h (68 mph, 59 kn)

Range: 1,260 km (780 mi, 680 nmi)

Service ceiling: 7,300 m (24,000 ft)

Time to altitude: 2,000 m (6,600 ft) in 4 minutes 45 seconds

4,000 m (13,000 ft) in 15 minutes 10 seconds

 

Armament:

2× fixed 8 mm (0.315 in) Flygplanskulspruta Ksp m/22F (M1919 Browning AN/M2) machine guns

in the wings outside of the propeller disc (with 600 RPG), plus

1× 8 mm (0.315 in) Ksp m/22F machine gun on a flexible mount in the rear cockpit with 800 rounds

Ventral and underwing hardpoints for a total external bomb load of 700 kg (1,500 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This purely fictional Swedish dive bomber was inspired by reading about Flygvapnet‘s pre-WWII trials with dive bombing tactics and the unsuited aircraft fleet for this task. When I found a Hasegawa SOC Seagull floatplane in The Stash™ and looks at the aircraft’s profile, I thought that it could be converted into a two-seat monoplane – what would require massive changes, though.

 

However, I liked the SOC’s boxy and rustic look, esp. the fuselage, and from this starting point other ingredients/donors were integrated. Work started with the tail. Originally, I wanted to retain the SOCs fin and stabilizer, but eventually found them oversized for a land-based airplane. In the scrap box I found a leftover fin from an Academy P-47, and it turned out to be a very good, smaller alternative, with the benefit that it visually lengthened the rear fuselage. The stabilizers were replaced with leftover parts from a NOVO Supermarine Attacker – an unlikely choice, but their size was good, they blended well into the overall lines of the aircraft, and they helped to stabilize the fin donor. Blending these new parts into to SOC’s hull required massive PSR, though.

 

The wings were also not an easy choice, and initially I planned the aircraft with a retractable landing gear. I eventually settled on the outer wings (just outside of the gullwing kink) from an MPM Ju 87 B, because of their shape and the archaic “double wings” that would complement the SOC’s rustic fuselage. However, at this point I refrained from the retractable landing gear and instead went for a fixed spatted alternative, left over from an Airfix Hs 123, which would round up the aircraft’s somewhat vintage look. Because the wheels were missing, I inserted two Matchbox MiG-21 wheels (which were left over in the spares bin from two different kits, though). The tail wheel came from an Academy Fw 190.

 

Cowling and engine inside (thankfully a 9-cylinder radial that could pose as a Mercury) were taken OOB, just the original two-blade propeller was replaced with a more appropriate three-blade alternative, IIRC from a Hobby Boss Grumman F4F. The cockpit was taken OOB, and I also used the two pilot figures from the kit. The rear crew member just had the head re-positioned to look sideways, and had to have the legs chopped off because there’s hardly and space under the desk with the radio set he’s sitting at.

 

The ventral 500 kg bomb came from a Matchbox Ju 87, the bomb arms are Fw 189 landing gear parts. Additional underwing pylons came from an Intech P-51, outfitted with 50 kg bombs of uncertain origin (they look as if coming from an old Hasegawa kit). The protruding machine gun barrel fairings on the wings were scratched from styrene rod material, with small holes drilled into them.

 

A real Frankenstein creation, but it does not look bad or implausible!

  

Painting and markings:

I gave the B 9 a camouflage that was carried by some Flygvapnet aircraft in the late Thirties, primarily by fighters imported from the United States but also some bombers like the B 3 (Ju 86). The IMHO quite attractive scheme consists on the upper surfaces of greenish-yellow zinc chromate primer (Humbrol 81, FS 33481), on top of which a dense net of fine dark green wriggles (supposed to be FS 34079, but I rather used Humbrol 163, RAF Dark Green, because it is more subdued) was manually applied with a thin brush, so that the primer would still shine through, resulting in a mottled camouflage.

 

On the real aircraft, this was sealed with a protective clear lacquer to which 5% of the dark green had been added, and I copied this procedure on the model, too, using semi-gloss acrylic varnish with a bit of Revell 46 added. The camouflage was wrapped around the wings’ leading edges and the spatted landing gear was painted with the upper camouflage, too.

 

The undersides were painted with Humbrol 87 (Steel Grey), to come close to the original blue-grey tone, which is supposed to be FS 35190 on this type of camouflage. The tone is quite dark, almost like RAF PRU Blue.

The interior was painted – using a Saab J 21 cockpit as benchmark – in a dark greenish grey (RAL 7009).

The model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel shading on the lower surfaces, because this effect would hardly be recognizable on the highly fragmented upper surface.

 

The markings are reflecting Flygvapnet’s m/37 regulations, from the direct pre-WWII era when the roundels had turned from black on white to yellow on blue but still lacked the yellow edge around the roundel for more contrast. F6 Västgöta flygflottilj was chosen because it was a dive bomber unit in the late Thirties, and the individual aircraft code (consisting of large white two-digit numbers) was added with the fin and the front of the fuselage. “27” would indicate an aircraft of the unit’s 2nd division, which normally had blue as a standardized color code, incorporated through the blue bands on the spats and the small "2nd div." tag on the rudder (from a contemporary F8 Swedish Gladiator).

 

Roundels and codes came from an SBS Models sheet, even though they belong to various aircraft types. Everything was finally sealed with matt acrylic 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 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.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on authentic facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The English Electric Skyspark was a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It remains the only UK-designed-and-built fighter capable of Mach 2. The Skyspark was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric, which was later merged into the newly-formed British Aircraft Corporation. Later the type was marketed as the BAC Skyspark.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 program. W.E.W. "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, was a keen early proponent of Britain's need to develop a supersonic fighter aircraft. In 1947, Petter approached the Ministry of Supply (MoS) with his proposal, and in response Specification ER.103 was issued for a single research aircraft, which was to be capable of flight at Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with F W "Freddie" Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, it had a 40° swept wing to keep the leading edge clear of the Mach cone. To mount enough power into the airframe, two engines were installed, in an unusual, stacked layout and with a high tailplane This proposal was submitted in November 1948, and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mock-up.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance. To achieve Mach 2 the wing sweep was increased to 60° with the ailerons moved to the wingtips. In late 1949, low-speed wind tunnel tests showed that a vortex was generated by the wing which caused a large downwash on the initial high tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1. In 1949, the Ministry of Supply had issued Specification F23/49, which expanded upon the scope of ER103 to include fighter-level manoeuvring. On 1 April 1950, English Electric received a contract for two flying airframes, as well as one static airframe, designated P.1.

 

The Royal Aircraft Establishment disagreed with Petter's choice of sweep angle (60 degrees) and the stacked engine layout, as well as the low tailplane position, was considered to be dangerous, too. To assess the effects of wing sweep and tailplane position on the stability and control of Petter's design Short Brothers were issued a contract, by the Ministry of Supply, to produce the Short SB.5 in mid-1950. This was a low-speed research aircraft that could test sweep angles from 50 to 69 degrees and tailplane positions high or low. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one. The proposed 60-degree wing sweep was retained, but the stacked engines had to give way to a more conventional configuration with two engines placed side-by-side in the tail, but still breathing through a mutual nose air intake.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury. These aircraft had been assigned the aircraft serials WG760, WG763, and WG765 (the structural test airframe). The prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, as the selected Rolls-Royce Avon engines had fallen behind schedule due to their own development problems. Since there was not much space in the fuselage for fuel, the thin wings became the primary fuel tanks and since they also provided space for the stowed main undercarriage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance. The narrow tires housed in the thin wings rapidly wore out if there was any crosswind component during take-off or landing. Outwardly, the prototypes looked very much like the production series, but they were distinguished by the rounded-triangular air intake with no center-body at the nose, short fin, and lack of operational equipment.

 

On 9 June 1952, it was decided that there would be a second phase of prototypes built to develop the aircraft toward achieving Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h); these were designated P.1B while the initial three prototypes were retroactively reclassified as P.1A. P.1B was a significant improvement on P.1A. While it was similar in aerodynamics, structure and control systems, it incorporated extensive alterations to the forward fuselage, reheated Rolls Royce Avon R24R engines, a conical center body inlet cone, variable nozzle reheat and provision for weapons systems integrated with the ADC and AI.23 radar. Three P.1B prototypes were built, assigned serials XA847, XA853 and XA856.

 

In May 1954, WG760 and its support equipment were moved to RAF Boscombe Down for pre-flight ground taxi trials; on the morning of 4 August 1954, WG760 flew for the first time from Boscombe Down. One week later, WG760 officially achieved supersonic flight for the first time, having exceeded the speed of sound during its third flight. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was plagued by directional stability problems and a dismal performance: Transonic drag was much higher than expected, and the aircraft was limited to Mach 0.98 (i.e. subsonic), with a ceiling of just 48,000 ft (14,630 m), far below the requirements.

 

To solve the problem and save the P.1, Petter embarked on a major redesign, incorporating the recently discovered area rule, while at the same time simplifying production and maintenance. The redesign entailed a new, narrower canopy, a revised air intake, a pair of stabilizing fins under the rear fuselage, and a shallow ventral fairing at the wings’ trailing edge that not only reduced the drag coefficient along the wing/fuselage intersection, it also provided space for additional fuel.

On 4 April 1957 the modified P.1B (XA847) made the first flight, immediately exceeding Mach 1. During the early flight trials of the P.1B, speeds in excess of 1,000 mph were achieved daily.

In late October 1958, the plane was officially presented. The event was celebrated in traditional style in a hangar at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough, with the prototype XA847 having the name ‘Skyspark’ freshly painted on the nose in front of the RAF Roundel, which almost covered it. A bottle of champagne was put beside the nose on a special rig which allowed the bottle to safely be smashed against the side of the aircraft.

On 25 November 1958 the P.1B XA847 reached Mach 2 for the first time. This made it the second Western European aircraft to reach Mach 2, the first one being the French Dassault Mirage III just over a month earlier on 24 October 1958

 

The first operational Skyspark, designated Skyspark F.1, was designed as a pure interceptor to defend the V Force airfields in conjunction with the "last ditch" Bristol Bloodhound missiles located either at the bomber airfield, e.g. at RAF Marham, or at dedicated missile sites near to the airfield, e.g. at RAF Woodhall Spa near the Vulcan station RAF Coningsby. The bomber airfields, along with the dispersal airfields, would be the highest priority targets in the UK for enemy nuclear weapons. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range – originally a radius of operation of only 150 miles (240 km) from the V bomber airfields was specified – and endurance. Armament consisted of a pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit, and two pylons for IR-guided de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles were added to the lower fuselage flanks. These hardpoints could, alternatively, carry pods with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets. The Ferranti AI.23 onboard radar provided missile guidance and ranging, as well as search and track functions.

 

The next two Skyspark variants, the Skyspark F.1A and F.2, incorporated relatively minor design changes, but for the next variant, the Skyspark F.3, they were more extensive: The F.3 had higher thrust Rolls-Royce Avon 301R engines, a larger squared-off fin that improved directional stability at high speed further and a strengthened inlet cone allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were all limited to Mach 1.7 (2,083 km/h). An upgraded A.I.23B radar and new, radar-guided Red Top missiles offered a forward hemisphere attack capability, even though additional electronics meant that the ADEN guns had to be deleted – but they were not popular in their position in front of the windscreen, because the muzzle flash blinded the pilot upon firing. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Skyspark yet, but this came at a steep price: higher fuel consumption, resulting in even shorter range. From this basis, a conversion trainer with a side-by-side cockpit, the T.4, was created.

 

The next interceptor variant was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3's shortcomings, the F.3A. The F.3A introduced two major improvements: a larger, non-jettisonable, 610-imperial-gallon (2,800 L) ventral fuel tank, resulting in a much deeper and longer belly fairing, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge. The conically cambered wing improved manoeuvrability, especially at higher altitudes, and it offered space for a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel by 716 imperial gallons (3,260 L). The enlarged ventral tank not only nearly doubled available fuel, it also provided space at its front end for a re-instated pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon with 120 RPG. Alternatively, a retractable pack with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets could be installed, or a set of cameras for reconnaissance missions. The F.3A also introduced an improved A.I.23B radar and the new IR-guided Red Top missile, which was much faster and had greater range and manoeuvrability than the Firestreak. Its improved infrared seeker enabled a wider range of engagement angles and offered a forward hemisphere attack capability that would allow the Skyspark to attack even faster bombers (like the new, supersonic Tupolev T-22 Blinder) through a collision-course approach.

Wings and the new belly tank were also immediately incorporated in a second trainer variant, the T.5.

 

The ultimate variant, the Skyspark F.6, was nearly identical to the F.3A, with the exception that it could carry two additional 260-imperial-gallon (1,200 L) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability, even though their supersonic drag was so high that the extra fuel would only marginally raise the aircraft’s range when flying beyond the sound barrier for extended periods.

 

Finally, there was the Skyspark F.2A; it was an early production F.2 upgraded with the new cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 imperial gallons (2,800 L) ventral tank. However, the F.2A retained the old AI.23 radar, the IR-guided Firestreak missile and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Skysparks, it had the longest tactical range of all variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over West Germany.

 

The first Skysparks to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, joining the Air Fighting Development Squadron (AFDS) of the Central Fighter Establishment, where they were used to clear the Skyspark for entry into service. The production Skyspark F.1 entered service with the AFDS in May 1960, allowing the unit to take part in the air defence exercise "Yeoman" later that month. The Skyspark F.1 entered frontline squadron service with 74 Squadron at Coltishall from 11 July 1960. This made the Skyspark the second Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the second fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe (the first one in both categories being the Swedish Saab 35 Draken on 8 March 1960 four months earlier).

 

The aircraft's radar and missiles proved to be effective, and pilots reported that the Skyspark was easy to fly. However, in the first few months of operation the aircraft's serviceability was extremely poor. This was due to the complexity of the aircraft systems and shortages of spares and ground support equipment. Even when the Skyspark was not grounded by technical faults, the RAF initially struggled to get more than 20 flying hours per aircraft per month compared with the 40 flying hours that English Electric believed could be achieved with proper support. In spite of these concerns, within six months of the Skyspark entering service, 74 Squadron was able to achieve 100 flying hours per aircraft.

 

Deliveries of the slightly improved Skyspark F.1A, with revised avionics and provision for an air-to-air refueling probe, allowed two more squadrons, 56 and 111 Squadron, both based at RAF Wattisham, to convert to the Skyspark in 1960–1961. The Skyspark F.1 was only ordered in limited numbers and served only for a short time; nonetheless, it was viewed as a significant step forward in Britain's air defence capabilities. Following their replacement from frontline duties by the introduction of successively improved Skyspark variants, the remaining F.1 aircraft were employed by the Skyspark Conversion Squadron.

The improved F.2 entered service with 19 Squadron at the end of 1962 and 92 Squadron in early 1963. Conversion of these two squadrons was aided by the of the two-seat T.4 and T.5 trainers (based on the F.3 and F.3A/F.6 fighters), which entered service with the Skyspark Conversion Squadron (later renamed 226 Operational Conversion Unit) in June 1962. While the OCU was the major user of the two-seater, small numbers were also allocated to the front-line fighter squadrons. More F.2s were produced than there were available squadron slots, so later production aircraft were stored for years before being used operationally; some of these Skyspark F.2s were converted to F.2As.

 

The F.3, with more powerful engines and the new Red Top missile was expected to be the definitive Skyspark, and at one time it was planned to equip ten squadrons, with the remaining two squadrons retaining the F.2. However, the F.3 also had only a short operational life and was withdrawn from service early due to defence cutbacks and the introduction of the even more capable and longer-range F.6, some of which were converted F.3s.

 

The introduction of the F.3 and F.6 allowed the RAF to progressively reequip squadrons operating aircraft such as the subsonic Gloster Javelin and retire these types during the mid-1960s. During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Skyspark's range and firepower shortcomings became increasingly apparent. The transfer of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs from Royal Navy service enabled these much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAF's interceptor force, alongside those withdrawn from Germany as they were replaced by SEPECAT Jaguars in the ground attack role.

The Skyspark's direct replacement was the Tornado F.3, an interceptor variant of the Panavia Tornado. The Tornado featured several advantages over the Skyspark, including far larger weapons load and considerably more advanced avionics. Skysparks were slowly phased out of service between 1974 and 1988, even though they lasted longer than expected because the definitive Tornado F.3 went through serious teething troubles and its service introduction was delayed several times. In their final years, the Skysparks’ airframes required considerable maintenance to keep them airworthy due to the sheer number of accumulated flight hours.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 51 ft 2 in (15,62 m) fuselage only

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14,092 kg) with armament and no fuel

Gross weight: 41,076 lb (18,632 kg) with two Red Tops, ammunition, and internal fuel

Max. takeoff weight: 45,750 lb (20,752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojet engines,

12,690 lbf (56.4 kN) thrust each dry, 16,360 lbf (72.8 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph+ at 40,000 ft)

Range: 738 nmi (849 mi, 1,367 km)

Combat range: 135 nmi (155 mi, 250 km) supersonic intercept radius

Range: 800 nmi (920 mi, 1,500 km) with internal fuel

1,100 nmi (1,300 mi; 2,000 km) with external overwing tanks

Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

Zoom ceiling: 70,000 ft (21,000 m)

Rate of climb: 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s) sustained to 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

Time to altitude: 2.8 min to 36,000 ft (11,000 m)

Wing loading: 76 lb/sq ft (370 kg/m²) with two AIM-9 and 1/2 fuel

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) ADEN cannon with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage

2× forward fuselage hardpoints for a single Firestreak or Red Top AAM each

2× overwing pylon stations for 2.000 lb (907 kg each)

for 260 imp gal (310 US gal; 1,200 l) ferry tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was a submission to the “Hunter, Lightning, Canberra” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and one of my personal ultimate challenges – a project that you think about very often, but the you put the thought back into its box when you realize that turning this idea into hardware will be a VERY tedious, complex and work-intensive task. But the thematic group build was the perfect occasion to eventually tackle the idea of a model of a “side-by-side engine BAC Lightning”, a.k.a. “Flatning”, as a rather conservative alternative to the real aircraft’s unique and unusual design with stacked engines in the fuselage, which brought a multitude of other design consequences that led to a really unique aircraft.

 

And it sound so simple: take a Lightning, just change the tail section. But it’s not that simple, because the whole fuselage shape would be different, resulting in less depth, the wings have to be attached somewhere and somehow, the landing gear might have to be adjusted/shortened, and how the fuselage diameter shape changes along the hull, so that you get a more or less smooth shape, was also totally uncertain!

 

Initially I considered a MiG Ye-152 as a body donor, but that was rejected due to the sheer price of the only available kit (ModelSvit). A Chinese Shenyang J-8I would also have been ideal – but there’s not 1:72 kit of this aircraft around, just of its successor with side intakes, a 1:72 J-8II from trumpeter.

I eventually decided to keep costs low, and I settled for the shaggy PM Model Su-15 (marketed as Su-21) “Flagon” as main body donor: it’s cheap, the engines have a good size for Avons and the pen nib fairing has a certain retro touch that goes well with the Lightning’s Fifties design.

The rest of this "Flatning" came from a Hasegawa 1:72 BAC Lightning F.6 (Revell re-boxing).

 

Massive modifications were necessary and lots of PSR. In an initial step the Flagon lost its lower wing halves, which are an integral part of the lower fuselage half. The cockpit section was cut away where the intake ducts begin. The Lightning had its belly tank removed (set aside for a potential later re-installation), and dry-fitting and crude measures suggested that only the cockpit section from the Lightning, its spine and the separate fin would make it onto the new fuselage.

 

Integrating the parts was tough, though! The problem that caused the biggest headaches: how to create a "smooth" fuselage from the Lightning's rounded front end with a single nose intake that originally develops into a narrow, vertical hull, combined with the boxy and rather wide Flagon fuselage with large Phantom-esque intakes? My solution: taking out deep wedges from all (rather massive) hull parts along the intake ducts, bend the leftover side walls inwards and glue them into place, so that the width becomes equal with the Lightning's cockpit section. VERY crude and massive body work!

 

However, the Lightning's cockpit section for the following hull with stacked engines is much deeper than the Flagon's side-by-side layout. My initial idea was to place the cockpit section higher, but I would have had to transplant a part of the Lightning's upper fuselage (with the spine on top, too!) onto the "flat" Flagon’s back. But this would have looked VERY weird, and I'd have had to bridge the round ventral shape of the Lightning into the boxy Flagon underside, too. This was no viable option, so that the cockpit section had to be further modified; I cut away the whole ventral cockpit section, at the height of the lower intake lip. Similar to my former Austrian Hasegawa Lightning, I also cut away the vertical bulkhead directly behind the intake opening - even though I did not improve the cockpit with a better tub with side consoles. At the back end, the Flagon's jet exhausts were opened and received afterburner dummies inside as a cosmetic upgrade.

 

Massive PSR work followed all around the hull. The now-open area under the cockpit was filled with lead beads to keep the front wheel down, and I implanted a landing gear well (IIRC, it's from an Xtrakit Swift). With the fuselage literally taking shape, the wings were glued together and the locator holes for the overwing tanks filled, because they would not be mounted.

 

To mount the wings to the new hull, crude measurements suggested that wedges had to be cut away from the Lightning's wing roots to match the weird fuselage shape. They were then glued to the shoulders, right behind the cockpit due to the reduced fuselage depth. At this stage, the Lightning’s stabilizer attachment points were transplanted, so that they end up in a similar low position on the rounded Su-15 tail. Again, lots of PSR…

 

At this stage I contemplated the next essential step: belly tank or not? The “Flatning” would have worked without it, but its profile would look rather un-Lightning-ish and rather “flat”. On the other side, a conformal tank would probably look quite strange on the new wide and flat ventral fuselage...? Only experiments could yield an answer, so I glued together the leftover belly bulge parts from the Hasegawa kit and played around with it. I considered a new, wider belly tank, but I guess that this would have looked too ugly. I eventually settled upon the narrow F.6 tank and also used the section behind it with the arrestor hook. I just reduced its depth by ~2 mm, with a slight slope towards the rear because I felt (righteously) that the higher wing position would lower the model’s stance. More massive PSR followed….

 

Due to the expected poor ground clearance, the Lightning’s stabilizing ventral fins were mounted directly under the fuselage edges rather than on the belly tank. Missile pylons for Red Tops were mounted to the lower front fuselage, similar to the real arrangement, and cable fairings, scratched from styrene profiles, were added to the lower flanks, stretching the hull optically and giving more structure to the hull.

 

To my surprise, I did not have to shorten the landing gear’s main legs! The wings ended up a little higher on the fuselage than on the original Lightning, and the front wheel sits a bit further back and deeper inside of its donor well, too, so that the fuselage comes probably 2 mm closer to the ground than an OOB Lightning model. Just like on the real aircraft, ground clearance is marginal, but when the main wheels were finally in place, the model turned out to have a low but proper stance, a little F8U-ish.

  

Painting and markings:

I was uncertain about the livery for a long time – I just had already settled upon an RAF aircraft. But the model would not receive a late low-viz scheme (the Levin, my mono-engine Lightning build already had one), and no NMF, either. I was torn between an RAF Germany all-green over NMF undersides livery, but eventually went for a pretty standard RAF livery in Dark Sea Grey/Dark Green over NMF undersides, with toned-down post-war roundels.

A factor that spoke in favor of this route was a complete set of markings for an RAF 11 Squadron Lightning F.6 in such a guise on an Xtradecal set, which also featured dayglo orange makings on fin, wings and stabilizers – quite unusual, and a nice contrast detail on the otherwise very conservative livery. All stencils were taken from the OOB Revell sheet for the Lightning. Just the tactical code “F” on the tail was procured elsewhere, it comes from a Matchbox BAC Lightning’s sheet.

 

After basic painting the model received the usual black ink washing, some post-panel-shading and also a light treatment with graphite to create soot strains around the jet exhausts and the gun ports, and to emphasize the raised panel lines on the Hasegawa parts.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final bits and pieces like the landing gear and the Red Tops (taken OOB) were mounted.

  

A major effort, and I have seriously depleted my putty stocks for this build! However, the result looks less spectacular than it actually is: changing a Lightning from its literally original stacked engine layout into a more conservative side-by-side arrangement turned out to be possible, even though the outcome is not really pretty. But it works and is feasible!

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.

+++ 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:

Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson, vice president of engineering and research at Lockheed's Skunk Works, visited USAF air bases across South Korea in November 1951 to speak with fighter pilots about what they wanted and needed in a fighter aircraft. At the time, the American pilots were confronting the MiG-15 with North American F-86 Sabres, and many felt that the MiGs were superior to the larger and more complex American design. The pilots requested a small and simple aircraft with excellent performance, especially high speed and altitude capabilities. Armed with this information, Johnson immediately started the design of such an aircraft on his return to the United States.

 

Work started in March 1952. In order to achieve the desired performance, Lockheed chose a small and simple aircraft, weighing in at 12,000 lb (5,400 kg) with a single powerful engine. The engine chosen was the new General Electric J79 turbojet, an engine of dramatically improved performance in comparison with contemporary designs. The small L-246 design remained essentially identical to the Model 083 Starfighter as eventually delivered.

 

Johnson presented the design to the Air Force on 5 November 1952, and work progressed quickly, with a mock-up ready for inspection at the end of April, and work starting on two prototypes that summer. The first prototype was completed by early 1954 and first flew on 4 March at Edwards AFB. The total time from contract to first flight was less than one year.

 

The first YF-104A flew on 17 February 1956 and, with the other 16 trial aircraft, were soon carrying out equipment evaluation and flight tests. Lockheed made several improvements to the aircraft throughout the testing period, including strengthening the airframe, adding a ventral fin to improve directional stability at supersonic speed, and installing a boundary layer control system (BLCS) to reduce landing speed. Problems were encountered with the J79 afterburner; further delays were caused by the need to add AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. On 28 January 1958, the first production F-104A to enter service was delivered.

 

Even though the F-104 saw only limited use by the USAF, later versions, tailored to a fighter bomber role and intended for overseas sales, were more prolific. This was in particular the F-104G, which became the Starfighter's main version, a total of 1,127 F-104Gs were produced under license by Canadair and a consortium of European companies that included Messerschmitt/MBB, Fiat, Fokker, and SABCA.

 

The F-104G differed considerably from earlier versions. It featured strengthened fuselage, wing, and empennage structures; a larger vertical fin with fully powered rudder as used on the earlier two-seat versions; fully powered brakes, new anti-skid system, and larger tires; revised flaps for improved combat maneuvering; a larger braking chute. Upgraded avionics included an Autonetics NASARR F15A-41B multi-mode radar with air-to-air, ground-mapping, contour-mapping, and terrain-avoidance modes, as well as the Litton LN-3 Inertial Navigation System, the first on a production fighter.

 

Germany was among the first foreign operators of the F-104G variant. As a side note, a widespread misconception was and still is that the "G" explicitly stood for "Germany". But that was not the case and pure incidence, it was just the next free letter, even though Germany had a major influence on the aircraft's concept and equipment. The German Air Force and Navy used a large number of F-104G aircraft for interception, reconnaissance and fighter bomber roles. In total, Germany operated 916 Starfighters, becoming the type's biggest operator in the world. Beyond the single seat fighter bombers, Germany also bought and initially 30 F-104F two-seat aircraft and then 137 TF-104G trainers. Most went to the Luftwaffe and a total of 151 Starfighters was allocated to the Marineflieger units.

 

The introduction of this highly technical aircraft type to a newly reformed German air force was fraught with problems. Many were of technical nature, but there were other sources of problems, too. For instance, after WWII, many pilots and ground crews had settled into civilian jobs and had not kept pace with military and technological developments. Newly recruited/re-activated pilots were just being sent on short "refresher" courses in slow and benign-handling first-generation jet aircraft or trained on piston-driven types. Ground crews were similarly employed with minimal training and experience, which was one consequence of a conscripted military with high turnover of service personnel. Operating in poor northwest European weather conditions (vastly unlike the fair-weather training conditions at Luke AFB in Arizona) and flying low at high speed over hilly terrain, a great many Starfighter accidents were attributed to controlled flight into terrain (CFIT). German Air Force and Navy losses with the type totaled 110 pilots, around half of them naval officers.

 

One general contributing factor to the high attrition rate was the operational assignment of the F-104 in German service: it was mainly used as a (nuclear strike) fighter-bomber, flying at low altitude underneath enemy radar and using landscape clutter as passive radar defense, as opposed to the original design of a high-speed, high-altitude fighter/interceptor. In addition to the different and demanding mission profiles, the installation of additional avionic equipment in the F-104G version, such as the inertial navigation system, added distraction to the pilot and additional weight that further hampered the flying abilities of the plane. In contemporary German magazine articles highlighting the Starfighter safety problems, the aircraft was portrayed as "overburdened" with technology, which was considered a latent overstrain on the aircrews. Furthermore, many losses in naval service were attributed to the Starfighter’s lack of safety margin through a twin-engine design like the contemporary Blackburn Buccaneer, which had been the German navy air arm’s favored type. But due to political reasons (primarily the outlook to produce the Starfighter in Southern Germany in license), the Marine had to accept and make do with the Starfighter, even if it was totally unsuited for the air arm's mission profile.

 

Erich Hartmann, the world's top-scoring fighter ace from WWII, commanded one of Germany's first (post-war) jet fighter-equipped squadrons and deemed the F-104 to be an unsafe aircraft with poor handling characteristics for aerial combat. To the dismay of his superiors, Hartmann judged the fighter unfit for Luftwaffe use even before its introduction.

In 1966 Johannes Steinhoff took over command of the Luftwaffe and grounded the entire Luftwaffe and Bundesmarine F-104 fleet until he was satisfied that the persistent problems had been resolved or at least reduced to an acceptable level. One measure to improve the situation was that some Starfighters were modified to carry a flight data recorder or "black box" which could give an indication of the probable cause of an accident. In later years, the German Starfighters’ safety record improved, although a new problem of structural failure of the wings emerged: original fatigue calculations had not taken into account the high number of g-force loading cycles that the German F-104 fleet was experiencing through their mission profiles, and many airframes were returned to the depot for wing replacement or outright retirement.

 

The German F-104Gs served primarily in the strike role as part of the Western nuclear deterrent strategy, some of these dedicated nuclear strike Starfighters even had their M61 gun replaced by an additional fuel tank for deeper penetration missions. However, some units close to the German borders, e.g. Jagdgeschwader (JG) 71 in Wittmundhafen (East Frisia) as well as JG 74 in Neuburg (Bavaria), operated the Starfighter as a true interceptor on QRA duty. From 1980 onwards, these dedicated F-104Gs received a new air superiority camouflage, consisting of three shades of grey in an integral wraparound scheme, together with smaller, subdued national markings. This livery was officially called “Norm 82” and unofficially “Alberich”, after the secretive guardian of the Nibelung's treasure. A similar wraparound paint scheme, tailored to low-level operations and consisting of two greens and black (called Norm 83), was soon applied to the fighter bombers and the RF-104 fleet, too, as well as to the Luftwaffe’s young Tornado IDS fleet.

 

However, the Luftwaffe’s F-104Gs were at that time already about to be gradually replaced, esp. in the interceptor role, by the more capable and reliable F-4F Phantom II, a process that lasted well into the mid-Eighties due to a lagging modernization program for the Phantoms. The Luftwaffe’s fighter bombers and recce Starfighters were replaced by the MRCA Tornado and RF-4E Phantoms. In naval service the Starfighters soldiered on for a little longer until they were also replaced by the MRCA Tornado – eventually, the Marineflieger units received a two engine aircraft type that was suitable for their kind of missions.

 

In the course of the ongoing withdrawal, a lot of German aircraft with sufficiently enough flying hours left were transferred to other NATO partners like Norway, Greece, Turkey and Italy, and two were sold to the NASA. One specific Starfighter was furthermore modified into a CCV (Control-Configured Vehicle) experimental aircraft under control of the German Industry, paving the way to aerodynamically unstable aircraft like the Eurofighter/Typhoon. The last operational German F-104 made its farewell flight on 22. Mai 1991, and the type’s final flight worldwide was in Italy in October 2004.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 54 ft 8 in (16.66 m)

Wingspan: 21 ft 9 in (6.63 m)

Height: 13 ft 6 in (4.11 m)

Wing area: 196.1 ft² (18.22 m²)

Airfoil: Biconvex 3.36 % root and tip

Empty weight: 14,000 lb (6,350 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 29,027 lb (13,166 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× General Electric J79 afterburning turbojet,

10,000 lbf (44 kN) thrust dry, 15,600 lbf (69 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,528 mph (2,459 km/h, 1,328 kn)

Maximum speed: Mach 2

Combat range: 420 mi (680 km, 360 nmi)

Ferry range: 1,630 mi (2,620 km, 1,420 nmi)

Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,000 m)

Rate of climb: 48,000 ft/min (240 m/s) initially

Lift-to-drag: 9.2

Wing loading: 105 lb/ft² (510 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.54 with max. takeoff weight (0.76 loaded)

 

Armament:

1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A1 Vulcan six-barreled Gatling cannon, 725 rounds

7× hardpoints with a capacity of 4,000 lb (1,800 kg), including up to four AIM-9 Sidewinder, (nuclear)

bombs, guided and unguided missiles, or other stores like drop tanks or recce pods

  

The kit and its assembly:

A relatively simple what-if project – based on the question how a German F-104 interceptor might have looked like, had it been operated for a longer time to see the Luftwaffe’s low-viz era from 1981 onwards. In service, the Luftwaffe F-104Gs started in NMF and then carried the Norm 64 scheme, the well-known splinter scheme in grey and olive drab. Towards the end of their career the fighter bombers and recce planes received the Norm 83 wraparound scheme in green and black, but by that time no dedicated interceptors were operational anymore, so I stretched the background story a little.

 

The model is the very nice Italeri F-104G/S model, which is based on the ESCI molds from the Eighties, but it comes with recessed engravings and an extra sprue that contains additional drop tanks and an Orpheus camera pod. The kit also includes a pair of Sidewinders with launch rails for the wing tips as well as the ventral “catamaran” twin rail, which was frequently used by German Starfighters because the wing tips were almost constantly occupied with tanks.

Fit and detail is good – the kit is IMHO very good value for the money. There are just some light sinkholes on the fuselage behind the locator pins, the fit of the separate tail section is mediocre and calls for PSR, and the thin and very clear canopy is just a single piece – for open display, you have to cut it by yourself.

 

Since the model would become a standard Luftwaffe F-104G, just with a fictional livery, the kit was built OOB. The only change I made are drooped flaps, and the air brakes were mounted in open position.

The ordnance (wing tip tanks plus the ventral missiles) was taken from the kit, reflecting the typical German interceptor configuration: the wing tips were frequently occupied with tanks, sometimes even together with another pair of drop tanks under the wings, so that any missile had to go under the fuselage. The instructions for the ventral catamaran launch rails are BTW wrong – they tell the builder to mount the launch rails onto the twin carrier upside down! Correctly, the carrier’s curvature should lie flush on the fuselage, with no distance at all. When mounted as proposed, the Sidewinders come very close to the ground and the whole installation looks pretty goofy! I slightly modified the catamaran launch rail with some thin styrene profile strips as spacers, and the missiles themselves, AIM-9Bs, were replaced with more modern and delicate AIM-9Js from a Hasegawa air-to-air weapons set. Around the hull, some small blade antennae, a dorsal rotating warning light and an angle-of-attack sensor were added.

  

Painting and markings:

The exotic livery is what defined this what-if build, and the paint scheme was actually inspired by a real world benchmark: some Dornier Do-28D Skyservants of the German Marineflieger received, late in their career, a wraparound scheme in three shades of grey, namely RAL 7030 (Steingrau), 7000 (Fehgrau) and 7012 (Basaltgrau). I thought that this would work pretty well for an F-104G interceptor that operates at medium to high altitudes, certainly better than the relatively dark Norm 64 splinter scheme or the Norm 83 low-altitude pattern.

 

The camouflage pattern was simply adopted from the Starfighter’s Norm 83 scheme, just the colors were exchanged. The kit was painted with acrylic paints from Revell, since the authentic tones were readily available, namely 75, 57 and 77. As a disrupting detail I gave the wing tip tanks the old Norm 64 colors: uniform Gelboliv from above (RAL 6014, Revell 42), Silbergrau underneath (RAL 7001, Humbrol’s 127 comes pretty close), and bright RAL 2005 dayglo orange markings, the latter created with TL Modellbau decal sheet material for clean edges and an even finish.

The cockpit interior was painted in standard medium grey (Humbrol 140, Dark Gull Grey), the landing gear including the wells became aluminum (Humbrol 56), the interior of the air intakes was painted with bright matt aluminum metallizer (Humbrol 27001) with black anti-icing devices in the edges and the shock cones. The radome was painted with very light grey (Humbrol 196, RAL 7035), the dark green anti-glare panel is a decal from the OOB sheet.

 

The model received a standard black ink washing and some panel post-shading (with Testors 2133 Russian Fulcrum Grey, Humbrol 128 FS 36320 and Humbrol 156 FS 36173) in an attempt to even out the very different shades of grey. The result does not look bad, pretty worn and weathered (like many German Starfighters), even though the paint scheme reminds a lot of the Hellenic "Ghost" scheme from the late F-4Es and the current F-16s?

 

The decals for the subdued Luftwaffe markings were puzzled together from various sources. The stencils were mostly taken from the kit’s exhaustive and sharply printed sheet. Tactical codes (“26+40” is in the real Starfighter range, but this specific code was AFAIK never allocated), iron crosses and the small JG 71 emblems come from TL Modellbau aftermarket sheets. Finally, after some light soot stains around the gun port, the afterburner and some air outlets along the fuselage with graphite, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A simple affair, since the (nice) kit was built OOB and the only really fictional aspect of this model is its livery. But the resulting aircraft looks good, the all-grey wraparound scheme suits the slender F-104 well and makes an interceptor role quite believable. Would probably also look good on a German Eurofighter? Certainly more interesting than the real world all-blue-grey scheme.

In the beauty pics the scheme also appears to be quite effective over open water, too, so that the application to the Marineflieger Do-28Ds made sense. However, for the real-world Starfighter, this idea came a couple of years too late.

+++ 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 21 cm Kanone 39 (K 39) was a Czech-designed heavy gun used by the Germans in the Second World War. It was original designed by Škoda as a dual-purpose heavy field and coast defence gun in the late 1930s for Turkey with the designation of ‘K52’. Only two had been delivered before the rest of the production run was appropriated by the Heer upon the occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939.

Initially, the K 39 only saw limited use as a field cannon in Operation Barbarossa, the Siege of Odessa, Siege of Leningrad and the Siege of Sevastopol. During the war, nine of these guns were sold to Sweden, too.

 

With the ongoing (and worsening) war situation and the development of heavy tank chassis towards late 1944, the K 39 received new attention and was adapted by the Wehrmacht as a long-range mortar, primarily intended as a mobile coastal defense weapon for strategically important naval sites, and as a second line artillery support. There were several reasons that made the heavy weapon still attractive: Unlike the German practice of sliding block breeches that required a metallic cartridge case to seal the gun's chamber against combustion gases, Škoda had preferred to use an interrupted screw breech with a deBange obdurator to seal the chamber. This lowered the rate of fire to 3 rounds in 2 minutes but had the great economic advantage of allowing bagged propellant charges that didn't use scarce brass or steel cartridge cases, since these metals became more and more short in supply. This also meant that the propellant charge could be adjusted to the intended range, what also helped save material.

The other unusual feature of the gun was a monobloc auto-frettaged barrel, created from a single piece of steel that was radially expanded under hydraulic pressure. This had the advantage of placing the steel of the barrel under compression, which helped it resist the stresses of firing and was simpler and faster to build since the barrel didn't require assembly as with more traditional construction techniques.

 

Every shell used by the K 39 weighed 135 kilograms (298 lb). HE shells (the 21 cm Gr 40), anti-concrete shells (21 cm Gr 39 Be) and an armor-piercing, base-fuzed shell, the 21 cm Pzgr 39 were available. The K 39 used a bagged charge with a total weight of 55 kilograms (121 lb). The base charge (“Kleine Ladung”) weighed 21.5 kilograms (47 lb) and had an igniter stitched to its base. The two increments (“Vorkart”) were lightly stitched together and enclosed in another bag tied at the top and with another igniter stitched to the base. The medium charge (“Mittlere Ladung”) consisted of the base charge and increment 2 while the full charge (“Grosse Ladung”) consisted of the base charge and both increments. The increments were loaded before the base charge. This resulted in a muzzle velocity of 800–860 m/s (2,600–2,800 ft/s) and a maximum firing range of 33 km (36,000 yd).

 

Emplacing the K 39 on its original box trail carriage took six to eight hours, mainly to dig in and anchor the firing platform, and a significant entourage was necessary to operate it. To improve the weapon’s handling and mobility, and to protect the crew especially against aircraft attacks, the K 39 was in 1943 to be mounted on a self-propelled chassis. Initially, a standardized “Schwerer Waffenträger”, which would also be able to carry other large-caliber guns (like the 17 cm Kanone 18 in Mörserlafette), was favored. However, the vehicle’s functional specification included the ability to set the heavy weapon gun down on the ground, so that it could be operated separately, and this meant an open weapon platform as well as complex and heavy mechanisms to handle the separate heavy guns. The Schwere Waffenträger’s overall high weight suggested the use of existing standard heavy tank elements and running gear and drivetrain elements from the heavy Tiger II battle tank were integrated into the design. The development of this mobile platform had high priority, but the focus on more and new battle tanks kept the resources allocated to the Schwerer Waffenträger project low so that progress was slow. As it became clear that the Schwere Waffenträger SPG would not become operational before 1945 a simpler alternative was chosen: the modification of an existing heavy tank chassis. Another factor was the Heeresleitung’s wish to protect the weapon and its crew through a fully enclosed casemate, and the ability to set the weapon down was dropped, too, to simplify the construction.

Originally, the SdKfz. 184 (Porsche’s chassis design for the Tiger I battle tank, which was not accepted in this role but instead developed into the tank hunter SPG Elefant/Ferdinand with a modified combat compartment at the rear, was chosen. But since this type’s production ended prematurely and many technical problems occurred through its complex propulsion system, the chassis of the Sd.Kfz. 186, the heavy Jagdtiger SPG, was selected instead, as it was the only readily available chassis at the time in production that was capable of carrying the K 39’s size and weight and of accepting its massive recoil forces.

 

The Jagdtiger itself was based on the heavy Tiger II battle tank, but it was lengthened by 260 mm. Due to production problems with its main armament, many Jagdtiger hulls were left uncompleted, and to bring more of these heavy vehicles to the frontlines it was adapted to the Sd.Kfz. 187, the Jagdtiger Ausf. M with a modified internal layout (casemate and engine bay positions were switched to fit an 88 mm gun with an extra-long barrel), a stronger but still experimental X16 gasoline engine, and a simplified Porsche running gear.

Since it was readily available, this re-arranged Jagdtiger base was adopted for the so-called Sd.Kfz. 190 “Küstenbatterie K 39 (auf Jagdtiger (Ausf. M)” self-propelled gun (SPG), or “KüBa 39” for short. The casemate-style combat section at the rear offered sufficient space for both the huge weapon and its crew, and also prevented the long gun barrel from hanging over too far ahead of the tank, improving its handling. Space for ammunition was still limited, though: racks on the casemate’s side walls offered space for only four rounds, while fifteen gun charges were stored separately. Gun elevation was between +50° and –3°, azimuth adjustment was achieved through turning the whole vehicle around.

The Sd.Kfz. 190’s hull featured the Jagdtiger’s standard heavy armor, since the Sd.Kfz. 190 was converted from existing lower bodies, but the new battle compartment was only heavily armored at the front. This was intended as a protection against incoming RPGs or bombs dropped from Hawker Hurricane or Typhoon fighter bombers, and as a sufficient protection against frontal ground attacks – the vehicle was supposed to retreat backwards into a safe position, then turn and move away. Roof and side walls had furthermore to be thinner to reduce the vehicle’s overall weight and lower its center of gravity, but they still offered enough protection against 20mm projectiles. Nevertheless, the Sd.Kfz. 190 weighed 64 tonnes (71 short tons), almost as much as the original Jagdtiger SPG it was based upon. Since it was not intended to operate directly at the front lines, the Sd.Kfz. 190 retained the Jagdtiger’s original (but rather weak) Maybach HL230 P30 TRM petrol engine with 700hp and the Henschel suspension with internal torsion bars, what simplified the conversions with readily available material.

 

A pair of retractable supports at the rear of the vehicle could be lowered to stabilize the vehicle when firing and distribute the gun’s massive recoil into the ground. The tall casemate’s rear featured a large double swing door which were necessary to avoid crew injuries from the massive gun’s pressure when it was firing. The doors were also necessary to re-load the gun – a small crane was mounted above the doors on the roof of the casemate, and a hoist to move the heavy rounds around in the casemate was mounted on tracks under the combat compartment’s ceiling.

 

The KüBa 39 had a standard crew of six men. The crew in the hull retained their role and positions from the Tiger II, with the driver located in the front left and the radio operator in the front right. This radio operator also had control over the secondary armament, a defensive machine gun located in a mount in the front glacis plate. In the casemate were the remaining 4 crew, which consisted of a commander (front right), the gunner (front left), and two loaders in the rear, which were frequently augmented by a third loader to handle the heavy rounds with an internal hoist under the casemate’s roof. Due to the severe maintenance and logistics needs, the KüBa 39 never operated on its own. Typically, several dedicated vehicles accompanied the self-propelled gun carrier as a “battle group”, including at least one ammunition carrier like the Hummel Munitionsträger, a crew transporter like a Sd.Kfz. 251 for more helping hands outside of the vehicle and frequently a command/radio vehicle to coordinate and direct the fire onto targets far beyond visual range.

 

The KüBa 39 was quickly developed and fielded, but it came too late for the Allied invasion in 1944 where it could have been a valuable asset to repel Allied ships that operated close to the French coast or even in second line in the Channel. The first vehicles became operational only in early 1945, and production was limited and rather slow. The ever-worsening war situation put more and more emphasis on the production of battle tanks and tank hunters, so that the heavy artillery vehicle only received low priority. However, the few vehicles that were produced (numbers are uncertain, but not more than 30 were eventually completed and fielded), found a wide range of uses – including the defense of the Elbe mouth and the Hamburg port. Some were shipped to Norway for coastal defense purposes, and a handful was allocated to the defense of German submarine bases in France.

Towards the end of hostilities, the survivors were integrated into infantry groups and used for long-range fire support at both Western and Eastern front. No vehicle survived, since most Sd.Kfz. 190 were destroyed by their crews after breakdowns or when the heavy vehicle got stuck in difficult terrain – its weight made the KüBa 39 hard to recover.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Six - seven (commander, gunner, 2 -3× loader, radio operator, driver)

Weight: 64 tonnes (71 short tons)

Length: 7.27 metres (23 ft 8 in) (hull only)

9.72 metres (31 ft 10 in) overall in marching configuration

Width: 3.88 metres (12 ft 9 in)

Height 3.81 metres (12 1/2 ft)

Ground clearance: 495 to 510 mm (1 ft 7.5 in to 1 ft 8.1 in)

Suspension: Torsion bar

Fuel capacity: 720 litres (160 imp gal; 190 US gal)

 

Armor:

25 – 150 mm (1 – 5.9 in)

 

Performance:

Speed

- Maximum, road: 38 km/h (23.6 mph)

- Sustained, road: 32 km/h (20 mph)

- Cross country: 15 to 20 km/h (9.3 to 12.4 mph)

Operational range: 120 km (75 mi) on road

80 km (50 mi) off road

Power/weight: 10,93 PS/tonne (9,86 hp/ton)

 

Engine:

V-12 Maybach HL HL230 P30 TRM gasoline engine with 700 PS

 

Transmission:

ZF AK 7-200 with 7 forward 1 reverse gears

 

Armament:

1× 21 cm K 39/41 L45 heavy siege gun with 4 rounds and 15 separate charges

1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 or 42 with 800 rounds in the front glacis plate

  

The kit and its assembly:

The project to put the massive (real) Czech 21 cm K39 gun on a German chassis had been on my agenda for a long time, but I have never been certain about the vehicle donor for this stunt. I initially favored a Modelcollect E-50/75 since it is available as an SPG version with a reversed engine/casemate layout. But this kit has two serious issues: it would IMHO be too late to be adapted for the pre-war weapon, and – worse - the kit has the flaw that the mould designers simply ignored the driver/radio operator in the hull’s front – the glacis plate immediately migrates into the engine deck and bay, so that there’s no internal space for the driver! Even if you’d assume that the driver would sit with the rest of the crew in the casemate behind the engine, there are no hatches, sights slits or mirrors? Well, it’s a fictional tank, but IMHO it has been poorly designed.

Correcting this might be possible, but then I could also convert something else, probably easier. This alternative became a serious option when I recently built my fictional Sd.Kfz. 187, a Jagdtiger with a reversed layout. This stunt turned out to be easier than expected, with good results, and since I had a second Jagdtiger kit left over from the Sd.Kfz. 187 project I simply used it for the KüBa 39 – also having the benefit of being rooted in an earlier time frame than the E-50/75, and therefore much more plausible.

 

The Trumpeter 1:72 Jagdtiger first lost its mid-positioned casemate. Internal stiffeners were glued into the hull and the engine deck was cut out and glued into the former casemate’s place, directly behind the driver section. The casemate for the 21 cm gun (a Revell field gun model of this weapon, highly detailed) was scratched, though, and designing it was a gradual step-by-step process. To offer more internal space, the engine deck was slightly shortened, what also changed the vehicle’s profile. From the Jagdtiger’s superstructure I just retained the roof. Things started with another donor piece, though, the massive gun mantlet from a Trumpeter 1:72 KV-2 tank. It was mated with the21 cm gun and the movable KV-2 mantlet mounted with styrene sheet spacer onto a scratched casemate front plate. More styrene sheet was used to create covers around the mantlet, and inside I glued an “arm” to the gun with lead bead ballast, so that the gun could be easier posed in raised position. The finished gun element was glued onto the hull, and the Tiger II roof positioned as far back as possible, what revealed a 3mm gap to the front plate – bridged by another styrene sheet filler, which was also used to raise the roof and add a kink to the roofline that would make the casemate look less boxy.

 

With the roofline defined I decided to extend the casemate backwards – after all, the original rear engine was gone and the vehicle would certainly need a spacious back door to enter and load it. Therefore, a back wall section was cut out and a casemate extension scratched from styrene sheet. When this was in place, the vertical casemate rear wall was added, and with the profile now fully defined the casemate side walls were created from 1.5 and 0.5 mm styrene sheet. The kink under the roofline was a self-imposed challenge, but I think that this extra effort was worthwhile because the casemate looks more organic than just a simple box design like the Ferdinand/Elefant’s superstructure?

Once the casemate was closed, surface details were added, including the doble door at the rear, the small crane on the roof, and the retractable supports (which came, IIRC, from a Modelcollect 1:72 T-72 kit). The rest of the original Jagdtiger kit was simply taken over OOB.

 

Painting and markings:

As a vehicle operated in the open field, I gave the KüBa 39 a classic, contemporary “Hinterhalt” paint scheme, in the sophisticated original style that was only applied to a few vehicles on factory level until the camouflage job was soon delegated to the frontline units. Painting started with a base coat of RAL 8000 (Grünbraun) as an overall primer, then 7028 Dunkelgelb (Tamiya TS-3) was sprayed onto the upper surfaces from a rattle can for a light shading effect. At this stage the markings/decals were already applied, so that the additional camouflage could be applied round them. They were puzzled together from the scrap box.

Then clusters/fields in Olivgrün (RAL 6003; Humbrol 86) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012, Humbrol 160) were added onto the sand tone base with circular templates/stencils made from densely foamed styrene that were glued onto the tip of toothpicks – the large casemate with its even surfaces lent itself for this elaborate “factory finish” scheme variant. The stamp method worked better than expected, and the result is very convincing. I just tried to concentrate the dark areas to the upper surfaces, so that the contrast against the ground when seen from above would be smaller than from a side view, which became more fragmented. The running gear remained uniform Dunkelgelb, as a counter-shading measure and to avoid wobbling patterns on camouflaged wheels that could attract attention while the vehicle would move.

 

After protecting the decals with a thin coat of varnish the model and the still separate wheels received a dark-brown washing with highly thinned acrylic paint and an overall dry-brushing treatment with light grey and beige. Additionally, water colors were used to simulate dust and light mud, and to set some rust traces on exposed areas.

 

Artist mineral pigments were dusted into the running gear and onto the tracks after their final assembly, and some mud crusts on the tail supports were created with a bit of matt acrylic varnish and more pigments.

  

A thorough conversion project, and the result is a really massive vehicle - its bulk is hard to convey, the Jagdtiger basis is already a massive vehicle, but this is "super-size", close to an E-100! However, you have to place something next to it to fathom the size of the 21 cm mortar and the huge casemate that covers it. But the conversion looks IMHO rather natural, esp. for a scratched work, and the Hinterhalt suits the bulky vehicle well, it really helps to break the outlines up.

Why limit yourself to architectural models?

 

Also, the engines can swivel for full vtol capacity.

 

+++ 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:

With the end of the conflict in Africa in early 1974, the Portuguese Armed Forces went through a reorganization and shifted their focus back from counter-insurgency to honoring Portugal's commitments to NATO and preparing for a possible conflict in Europe against the Warsaw Pact. The Portuguese Air Force's F-86F Sabre and G.91 fighters were considered to be outdated in both the air defense and ground attack roles to face Soviet forces in the European operations theater. Furthermore, only a few Sabre fighters were actually in service due to problems with the engines and lack of spare parts.

 

After the revolution Portugal faced financial problems and the new government didn't see the modernization of the armed forces as a priority. As such the Air Force counted on the support from the United States through the military assistance programs and the offsets and compensations for the use of the Lajes Air Base. In June 1974 the Air Force Chief of Staff, General Manuel Diogo Neto, informed the US Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) in Lisbon of the interest in acquiring one F-5E Tiger II squadron and one F-4E Phantom II squadron, as well as T-38A Talon and T-41, to replace the T-33 Shooting Star and the DHC-1 Chipmunk, respectively.

 

The United States’ NATO delegation was worried about Portugal's capability in contributing to NATO operations and felt that the intention to purchase either the F-4E Phantom II or the F-5E Tiger II to replace the F-86F Sabre was inappropriate, given that the USA felt that the A-7D Corsair II or the A-4N Skyhawk provided a better platform for the Portuguese role in an eventual conflict with the Warsaw Pact, which was to mainly protect the Atlantic Ocean resupply routes from the United States to Europe.

 

By 1976 the Northrop F-5E Tiger II had become the sole preferred aircraft by the military command, which believed that this aircraft could be supplied by The Pentagon at a lower cost through the Military Assistance Program (MAP) and the Foreign Military Sales (FMS). To this end, Portugal leased Northrop T-38A Talon jet trainers, as part of the "Peace Talon" program, to establish and provide supersonic-capable lead-in fighter training and to eventually provide operational conversion.

 

Later in March 1976, a camouflage scheme for the F-5 was published in the Diário da República, stirring public awareness and political pressure. Nonetheless, at the time the FAP had already started analyzing the acquisition of the A-7 Corsair II as an alternative to the F-5, per the suggestion of the United States. This led to the acquisition of 30 A-7A Corsair II for 49 million dollars. But even with the A-7 taking precedence, the FAP continued interest in acquiring the F-5 for the air defense role and as a proper replacement for the outdated F-86F Sabre.

As such, a delegation was sent to Norway in July 1979 to evaluate F-5A/B aircraft of the Royal Norwegian Air Force. This offer was turned down, since the offered 11 F-5As turned out to require considerable repairs due to cracks found in the airframe. Furthermore, the FAP was particularly interested in twin-seat F-5 fighters, but the RNoAF did not plan on retiring any of its F-5B aircraft at that time. In November 1984, the United States offered four F-5As with spare engines to Portugal, but this offer was also declined, since the aircraft had already logged over 3,000 flight hours and needed thorough repair, too. In the same year, the RNoAF made a new offer of 15 to 20 F-5A/Bs, but this time the FAP declined, once more due to the airframes’ age and poor condition.

 

Unable to purchase any F-5 in decent condition, the FAP studied in the meantime the procurement of other second-hand fighters like the French Mirage IIIs or the SAAB 35 Draken. Negotiations with France, even though the preferred partner and with the intention to procure Mirage V fighter bombers, too, went nowhere. Eventually, a deal with Sweden could be settled in 1985 and the Saab 35 was chosen as the FAP’s new air superiority fighter.

 

The Draken had been developed during the 1940s and 1950s to replace Sweden's first generation of jet-powered fighter aircraft, the Saab J 29 Tunnan and, later, the fighter variant (J 32 B) of the Saab 32 Lansen. Fully developed in Sweden, the Draken was introduced into service with the Swedish Air Force in 1960 under the designation J 35 (the prefix J standing for “Jakt”, meaning “pursuit”). Early models were intended purely to perform air defense missions and the type was considered to be a capable dogfighter for the Cold War era. Later models were technically very advanced and the J 35 underwent a constant development that led to a long line of variants with several upgrades.

 

By the 1980s, the Swedish Air Force’s Drakens had largely been replaced by the more advanced Saab 37 Viggen fighter, while the introduction of the more capable Saab JAS 39 Gripen fighter was expected in service within a decade, although delayed. Many J 35s of earlier versions, primarily the D type as well as some early J 35 F, were therefore mothballed and/or offered for sale. Takers were Finland and Austria, some Draken also sold to private operators in the United States. A dedicated export version for Denmark, rather a strike aircraft than an interceptor, was built, too.

 

The FAP was interested in the J 35 F, since these aircraft were the most modern Draken variant at the time and the relatively young airframes promised a long service life. An initial batch of eight aircraft – six single seaters plus a pair of two-seat trainers – was leased by Portugal and delivered in 1986. These were effectively refurbished former Swedish Saab J 35 F interceptors and Sk 35 C trainers. Internally at Saab, the Draken versions for Portugal were designated Saab J or Sk 35 XP (“X” for export and “P” for Portugal), but this designation was not adopted officially.

For Portugal, the machines were stripped off of specialized Swedish equipment and instead outfitted with NATO-compatible avionics and other updates like the Hawé mods I & II on the P/S-01/011 radar sets to improve its resistance to ECM. In contrast to the Swedish Saab J 35 F, the avionics that were necessary to deploy the Rb 27 and Rb 28 missiles (Hughes AIM-4 Falcon with radar and IR guidance) were removed and the second gun reinstalled. The J 35 F’s IR sensor under the nose was retained and a Sherloc radar warning system of French origin, as well as chaff/flare dispensers, were added, too.

 

In Portuguese service, the machines were called Saab 35 FP and TP and dubbed “Dragõe”. The fighters’ main armament were, beyond the internal 30 mm cannons, AIM-9 Sidewinders. Typically, a pair of these missiles was carried under the wings, together with a pair of 500 l drop tanks under the fuselage, since the Draken had no in-flight refueling capability and just a range of 1.120 km (696 mi) in clean configuration and with internal fuel only. The machines retained a secondary strike capability, though, with iron bombs of up to 1.000 lb caliber, napalm tanks and unguided missiles in pods. The trainers were unarmed but could carry an optional single 500 l drop tank on a ventral hardpoint.

 

The leased aircraft batch arrived in bare metal finish, but, due to the country’s proximity to the open sea, they quickly received an overall coat with a grey anti-corrosive lacquer. They were allocated to Esquadra 201 "Falcões" at Monte Real air base, where they replaced the last operational F-86F’s. They were officially allocated to an interceptor role, but effectively they were primarily used for conversion training, together with the T-38’s which had been based at Monte Real since 1977, too.

 

With enough trained Draken crews at hand, a second batch of former Swedish Draken (this time twelve single seaters plus two more trainers) was bought and delivered in 1987, the machines from the initial leasing batch were eventually bought, too. This small fleet was split between Esquadra 201 and 103 (the latter at Beja air base), so that the FAP could now field two fully operational interceptor squadrons. Upon arrival, the new machines received a tactical camouflage with toned-down national and the J 35s from the initial batch were re-painted accordingly.

 

The ongoing process of the modernization of the Portuguese Air Force also included the launching of the SICCAP/PoACCS (Portugal Air Command and Control System) project, which was a pioneer in adopting the new architecture and concept of the NATO ACCS, being intended to replace Portugal’s old SDA air defense system. As part of these project, the air surveillance and detection units were re-equipped, including the reception of new radars and the air control center at Monsanto was enhanced. The Saab 35 FPs became an integral part of this system, so that interceptors could be guided from the ground towards potential targets.

 

This scenario did not last long, though: The end of the Cold War caused the Portuguese Air Force to accompany the shift of the focus of the Portuguese Armed Forces from a conventional war in Europe against the Warsaw Pact forces to the international peace enforcement missions. The FAP started to participate in a number of missions by itself or in support of missions led by the Army and the Navy, but the Saab 35s were not involved since they remained, due to their small number, dedicated to Portugal’s air space patrol and defense.

 

With the arrival of the first F-16 Fighting Falcon in 1994, the Saab 35s, as well as the FAP’s A-7 Corsair IIs, were gradually retired and fully replaced until 1998.

The last Saab 35 in Swedish service was retired in 1999, the last Saab 35 Draken was withdrawn from military use in Austria in 2005 – 50 years after the type first flew. However, several aircraft still fly today in private operators’ service.

  

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: 7,865 kg (17,339 lb)

Gross weight: 11,000 kg (24,251 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 11,914 kg (26,266 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6C (license-built Rolls Royce Avon with Swedish afterburner)

turbojet engine, 56.5 kN (12,700 lbf) thrust dry, 78.4 kN (17,600 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 2,450 km/h (1,520 mph, 1,320 kn) at 11,000 m (36,089 ft)

Maximum speed: Mach 2

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

4× hardpoints with a capacity of 2,900 kg (6,393 lb); typical interceptor ordnance:

2× 500 l ventral drop tanks and 2× AIM-9 Sidewinder under the wings

  

The kit and its assembly:

This what-if model came as a spontaneous idea when I browsed through the WWW for inspiration. I stumbled upon the history of the Portuguese Air Force and the fact that it did not operate any dedicated interceptor for 15 years – this task was taken over by the PAF’s A-7s(!) until the F-16 arrived in the Nineties This gap offered a lot of whiffing potential, and I had actually considered to build a whiffy FAP Mirage III for some time, since I knew that this was, together with the F-5, the favored type. However, there was also serious consideration of the Saab 35 as potential fighter alternative, too!

 

I found this idea so weird/exotic that I decided to build a Draken in FAP colors. The kit is the Hasegawa model, in a Revell re-boxing. I also considered the vintage Revell Saab 35 (a mold from 1957!), but after I saw the kit in a current re-boxing from Polish company Akkura, I took the chance of a reasonably priced Hasegawa kit instead. While the Akkura kit is crisply molded, it would take a lot of work to create a satisfactory “modern” Draken from it. I also had a Heller kit in store (my personal favorite), but I did not want to “sacrifice” it for this project.

 

The Hasegawa/Revell kit was basically built OOB. The kit is a simple, straightforward affair, with fine recessed engravings and good fit, but it’s IMHO far from extraordinary. It also has its flaws: the dashboard is totally blank, any instruments have to be created by yourself or taken from the decal sheet. There are ejection marks on the wheels and the landing gear covers, and the fit quality of some areas (e .g. the seam between the fuselage and the afterburner section) calls for PSR. The two-piece canopy is thin, very clear and fits well, the landing gear is sufficiently detailed – including the interior of the main landing gear wells.

 

For the FAP version I did not change much; I just replaced the seat (which OOB looks fine, I just wanted “something else”), added a radar warning antenna to the fin’s tip and chaff dispensers around the tail section, all carved from styrene profiles.

Unfortunately, the Revell re-boxing just comes with a pair of launch rails and underwing pylons, but no AA weapons at all. That’s acceptable for the anniversary machine that you can build from the kit, but leaves the other option, a grey, Swedish J35 H, without any ordnance.

The drop tanks on my build are OOB, together with their ventral hardpoints, and I added a pair of decent AIM-9J Sidewinders from a Hasegawa air-to-air weapon set for a suitable interceptor ordnance. The launch rails were recycled from the kit: they are actually missile rails with attachment points to mount them under the air intakes. The rails were separated and then attached to the OOB underwing pylons, this worked very well.

  

Painting and markings:

The livery was not an easy choice. Initially I favored a uniform pale grey livery with blue squadron markings, inspired by the late F-86s of FAP 51 squadron, but found this, despite being a plausible look for an interceptor, to look quite boring. For the same reason I rejected an Austria-style “Hill II” scheme or a light-grey USN-inspired “Compass Ghost” livery. The Hellenic “Ghost” wraparound scheme was another potential option, but I recently used something similar on another whif build (the Catalonian L-159 ALCA), and it would not have a typically Portuguese Cold War look.

 

Keeping in style with the FAP’s livery fashion during the Eighties, I rather settled upon a USAF SEA scheme, which was carried by many PAF aircraft during the Eighties, e .g. the A-7P, the G.91, and their replacement from 1993 onwards, the Alpha Jet. Instead of a wraparound version for ground attack aircraft, I rather gave the Draken light grey undersides.

 

The camouflage pattern itself was improvised, since I did not want to copy an existing delta wing aircraft (e.g. the USAF’s F-102 or F-106 SEA pattern, or the Belgian Mirage Vs). The basic colors are Humbrol 75 (Bronze Green; the authentic tone is FS 34079, but this lacks IMHO contrast to the lighter green), 117 (FS 34102) and 118 (FS 30219) from above, and Humbrol 28 (FS 36622) 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 Steel Metallizer (ModelMaster) and later treated with Matt Aluminum Metallizer (Humbrol).

Internal details like the cockpit and the landing gear were painted with the help of Swedish and Austrian Saab 35 reference pictures. The cockpit tub was painted in a dark, bluish green (Humbrol 76) with grey-green (Revell 67) side walls. A piece of paper tissue covers the cockpit’s back wall, since the kit leaves a visible and rather ugly seam there, which is only partly hidden behind the seat.

The landing gear and its respective wells were painted with Humbrol 56 (Aluminum Dope), 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 front wheel received a dark green mudguard (Humbrol 30), the same color was also partially used on the extended emergency current generator. Missiles and launch rails were painted in gloss white (Humbrol 22).

 

As per usual, the model received a light black ink wash and some post-shading in order to emphasize the panels and dramatize the surface. Some extra weathering was done around the gun ports and the jet nozzle with graphite.

 

For markings I used the contemporary A-7Ps as benchmark: they were minimal, there were even no squadron markings or other decorations, and I think they even lacked roundels on their wings!

I gave the Draken slightly more markings: The small FAP roundels come from a PrintScale A/T-37 sheet, the fin flashes are from a TL Modellbai sheet and the tactical codes belong to a Japanese T-4 trainer. Most stencils were taken from the Revell OOB sheet, which also includes decals for the reddish sealer around the cockpit windows.

 

I didn’t want to leave the Draken without any squadron marking, though, so I gave it a blue band on top of the fin, as a reminiscence of the FAP 51 squadron’s markings, the former final F-86 operator which became 201 squadron in the early Eighties. These were simply done with layered white and blue decal stripes.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri), except for the black radome, which received a sheen varnish coat.

  

A relatively simple whif project, since the model was mostly built OOB with just minor cosmetic changes. However, despite its exotic operator, the USAF South East Asia scheme suits the Draken well, the whole thing looks disturbingly convincing!?

It’s also a kind of tribute build for “Sport16ing”, apparently a great fan of my what-if builds who frequently re-posts pictures and background stories (with kind permission to do so!) at deviantart.com.

Some background:

The Type-R13EX Phantom was an experimental unmanned labor developed by Schaft Enterprises’ Planning Section 7. The exact purpose of the labor remains unclear, it might only have been a singular prototype for innovative weapon and A.I. technology, so that it is most possible that the type or its systems were primarily intended for military service, even though the Type-R13EX as such was not adopted for serial production. Its silhouette is reminiscent of the military Brocken labor, which could mean that the Phantom's body was based on the Type 7B/2B. However, the difference lies in mobility, since the Phantom was slower due to having thick armor and carrying on his torso the complex mechanism necessary to carry out his attacks.

 

The R13EX Phantom measured 8.6 meters in height and was 4.7 meters wide, with a minimum turning radius of 6.2 meters. It weighed 9.5 tons without equipment and 9.85 fully equipped and had an impressive lift capacity of around 4.0 tons. It was revolutionary for being the first labor to be equipped with laser weaponry, against which at the time of its fielding no countermeasure was available for. However, the laser cannons mounted in the Phantom's head were its only active ranged weapons, and they required time to warm up before each shot. While charging up a shot, the Phantom's cooling vents would be exposed to attack, and damage to them would cause the labor to become unable to fire. On his back he carries the necessary instruments to charge the energy of the laser cannons. Before firing, 3 segments of the back armor unfolded, revealing what appeared to be a heat sink. When the laser fired, an intense shock of heat was released backwards from this installation. This major drawback was offset by the sheer power of the lasers, which were capable of easily piercing an AV-98 Ingram's armor; because they fired a sustained beam, the lasers could be used to cut off entire limbs from opposing labors or pierce heavy vehicle armor.

 

The mechanical systems of the Phantom were state-of-the-art and surpassed those of the mass-produced police and military labors of the time. Its immense strength and dexterity allowed the type to excel at hand-to-hand combat, so while its other offensive systems were offline, the Phantom would remain combat-capable. Aiding its combat effectiveness was the Phantom's thick armor plating made from reinforced carbon fiber. Even the armor covering the machine's forearms was capable of shrugging off a close-range shot from an Ingram's 37mm revolver cannon or deflect rounds from JGSDF Helldivers’ machine guns. The Phantom was even capable of limited underwater operation and could fire its main weapons even while submerged. The full extent of its marine capabilities is unknown, though. It can be assumed that the mechanical systems of the Phantom were carried over to the Type J-9 Griffon, on account of the visual similarities of some armor components and the type's immense strength. While the unmanned Phantom was apparently designed to test advanced weapons systems, the Griffon was instead created to rely solely on its strength and dexterity, making it an unparalleled hand-to-hand combat machine.

 

Despite the advanced weapons and mechanical systems, the most striking advancements brought about by the Phantom were its control and electronics systems. The labor was unmanned (and did not feature a pilot cabin) and remotely controlled, but it was also fully capable of autonomous combat against even skilled labor pilots. The advanced autopilot and its artificial intelligence were even capable of threat-assessment, tactical real-time analysis and could make strategic decisions in battle. Where a traditional labor would house a cockpit, the Phantom contained a powerful electromagnetic pulse (EMP) generator, which was capable of completely shutting down a police labor at close range. Like the laser cannons, the EMP generator required significant time to charge before it could be utilized. Additionally, the EMP system not only required the use of the vulnerable cooling vents used by the lasers, but also required armor panels around it be removed/opened so that they would not interfere with its directed pulse radiation. This meant that the EMP generator was exposed during all stages of its operation, and while the charging process could be halted at any time, it was this vulnerability that ultimately led to the defeat of the Phantom in combat. However, as a “last line” defensive measure for the exposed EMP generator the opening was protected with four small extendible rotating blades/wire cutters.

 

The Type-R13EX Phantom was first deployed in December 1998, on a cold Christmas night, when it attacked Tokyo Teleport, a terrestrial communications station for the retransmission of different television, voice and data services via satellite. It faced off with Patlabors of the Tokyo Metropolitan Police Special Vehicles Unit, Division 1 and Division 2. The Phantom was able to quickly defeat the outdated MPL-97S Python labors initially fielded by Division 1, allowing Schaft operatives to capture their pilots and support crew.

When Division 2 arrived at the scene, they quickly deployed their more advanced AV-98 Ingrams to engage the Phantom. Isao Ohta was the first to engage it, sustaining heavy damage to his labor and failing to cause any real damage to the R13EX. Noa Izumi was the second Division 2 pilot to engage the Phantom, and was able to hold her own until the Phantom caught her and prepared to fire its laser cannons directly into her cockpit. Noa was only saved when Kanuka Clancy, piloting Ohta's severely damaged labor, intervened in the fight. The Phantom was thrown into the bay, presumed destroyed.

 

However, just a few months later, the Phantom appeared once more at a Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF) training ground at Oshima, where it engaged a number of light military labors in combat. The JGSDF labors were unable to repel the Phantom, and Patlabor units that arrived on scene shortly after were barely able to fend it off. This was the final appearance and known deployment of the Phantom before the debut of the Griffon.

  

The kit and its assembly:

It has been a while that I built a humanoid mecha, and the mysterious Phantom labor (or better: robot) from the Patlabor anime TV series was still missing in my collection. I have already built this kit, even though as a heavily modified fictional German police labor.

 

The kit was built almost OOB – it is a rather simple mecha/action figure kit which can probably built without using any glue. As such, the detail level is not very high, but the Phantom Labor is a rather sleek design with a very organic and clean shape. Therefore, I just added some bits and pieces to the “interior”, in the opening under the head/face and around the removable EMP generator block in the torso, which can be plugged between the hips and the torso to depict the “open” body. Most details were made from styrene profile, but I also used sprue material, paper tissue dipped in white glue, soft iron wire and plastic-coated steel wire to create the hydraulic pistons under the chin (which can hardly be seen, though, just from certain angles).

 

Another option is to display the heat exchanger arrangement on the Phantom’s back in open and closed position – the open module is well detailed. However, I made a mistake when I assembled the latter, because I did not read the instructions properly (which could be better drawn, some illustrations, e .g,. the assembly of the upper arms, leave you guessing). The kit's designers want you to fix the "reactor" part to the back of the mecha, and then you can alternatively put the closed heat exchanger onto/over it, or mount the three opened covers to it. I found this construction weird and intuitively glued the reactor piece to the open covers, only to find out later that the closed cover section needs the recator piece underneth to hold onto the Phantom's back and cover some gaps. Luckily I had the reactor piece left over from my first Phantom Labor build, thanks to the thorough conversion I did with it, so that I had a suitable donor part to mend the mistake. Phew... O.o'

 

A unique (if not odd?) design feature of Bandai’s Patlabor IP models are the silicone sleeves over an endoskeleton for arms and legs. When you follow the instructions, they are easy to mount, though, just be careful when you want to paint them: only acrylic paint is recommended, since any solvent-based paint might react with the silicone. I have also heard of many builders having problems over time with the silicone, but – with some of these kits that I have built now 20 or more years on display – I never had any issues of problems?

 

However, on this specific kit (bought as “used” but still NIB; not certain about its production date or age, but I assume it's from the initial 1990 run and not a re-issue from 2014 or later) I found the sleeves to be disturbingly thin and their inside surfaces stuck together. "Opening" them was a tedious and delicate task, even though the silicone/rubber material was still intact and not melded together. The parts were still sealed in their plastic bags, but a single IP sprue (the light purple material) was quite brittle (while the others were fine), too. I can only guess that the kit had been poorly stored before I bought it, probably in an attic where it was exposed to excessive summer heat that vaporized and extracted some of the plastic/silicone softeners?

 

The kit goes together easily and can be assembled as a snap-fit kit without glue, even though the silicone sleeves require some manual skill to trim them properly. However, apparently design with robustness in mind the extremities’ fit is not too good and requires PSR on every seam for a proper finish. Another problem: the shoulder sections with the additional guards are designed in a matryoshka fashion, with three flexible layers of parts over each other, so that you have to finish each layer individually (PSR and paint) before you can add the next. On the other side you can assemble, paint and finish many segments of the model separately, to be completed as final step.

  

Painting and markings:

I stuck to the mecha’s appearance in the TV series, which features quite dark colors and yellow highlights around the hull. The basic color appears to be a little controversial, as it is described as “cobalt blue”, but on TV the color rather reminds of a purple tone, and the kit is molded in a similarly colored plastic. Maybe (as often) a translation issue?

 

Another problem: there are no clear painting instructions - you have to refer to the box art illustration (which only shows the front of the mecha in dubious light conditions) and pictures of the finished model on the box' sides, but these are very small and are not truly helpful. The instructions themselves are disappointing, too: the product designers decided to use a poster format, which shows the box art on one side (looks cool, but it's not helpful!) and only a tiny b/w picture of the model with vague color indications. This leaves the builder guessing about many painting details. You can find some screenshots of the Phantom Labor online, or you can try to find videos of the TV series' episodes where it appears, but in the end there's a lot to be guesstimated or made up.

 

To keep the Phantom mysterious and give it a less comic-esque look I decided to stay true to its impression on TV but add effects like weathering and post-shading – similar to my Dorvack PA models.

For the purplish basic color I used a rather exotic tone: Humbrol’s vintage “HJ4” from the brand’s long-gone Authentic range, the infamous and highly dubious WWII “Mauve N.9” (a.k.a. “IJN Purple”) that some A6M2-Ns were supposed to have carried. This is a kind of purple, but a rather greyish and dull tone that looks more like a military/camouflage tone than decorative/flashy. The mauve tone is less bluish than the Phantom's “authentic” tone on TV, but it looks fine to me and offers enough contrast to the darker sections, which were painted in Humbrol 112 (Tarmac, also sold as Field Blue?), which is a very dark blue-grey, very similar to FS 35042 (USN Dark Sea Blue) but less greenish. The color of some areas, like the "hood" behind the head unit, had to be guessed, and I outlines some surface details on the back with black to add contrasts.

 

The skull-like head unit was painted in a very light grey instead of pure white, to avoid too much contrast to the rest of the mecha. The silicone sleeves were treated with thinned grey and black artist acrylic paint with very fine pigments to avoid long-term chemical reactions with the softener in the rubber material.

The technical innards, the reactor on the back and the EMP generator in the torso, were painted in a bare metallic finish. I used Humbrol 56 as basis and then layered some washings with black ink and thinned black acrylic paint over it, plus dry-brushing with brighter aluminum and rubbing the parts with graphite, which adds a dark metallic shine and a more natural look.

The lenses on the head and in the torso were laid out with silver and then "filled" with clear acrylic paints in various shades.

 

The parts also received a black ink washing to emphasize edges and engravings, as well as dry-brushing/post-shading with lightened/dulled-down basic tones to make the model looks less toyish, and the give the Phantom Labor a slightly worn look. Unfortunately, the kit only comes with stickers instead of decals, but since these comprise onyl some small Schaft Enterprises logos and black inserts for louvres on arms and legs, which I had painted, anyway, so that I left the model without markings. Finally, all parts (except for the silicone sleeves) received a coat with matt acrylic varnish, and the model as finally assembled/completed.

  

It took a long time that I eventuelly tackled and finished the Phantom Labor kit to complete my collection of Patlabor mecha - only the Type Zero police prototype is still missing and a respective kit already waiting in the The Stash. Thanks to me experience with a former build of this kit, I knew what I had to expect, even though the mistake with the optional parts for the heat exchanger on the back bugs me, but I am happy that I had a spare part to save the situation. The dubious IJN purple tone turned out to be lighter than expected, esp. when you see screenshots of the "real" Phantom Labor in direct comparison, but on the other side the color does not look bad or wrong - the overall impression is IMHO O.K., and the bigger contrast to the dark blue-grey sections on the body make the model look more interesting than the orginal all-murky livery.

 

Category: Model Kit.

Name: Quiltra Queleual Class Landing Ship.

Scale: 1/20, 000 scale.

Origin: Japanese anime: The Super Dimension Fortress, Macross.

Brand: Arii.

Material: Styrene Plastic.

Release Date: 1983.

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 historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Development studies at Grumman for jet-powered fighter aircraft began near the end of World War II as the first jet engines emerged. In a competition for a jet-powered night fighter for the United States Navy, on 3 April 1946 the Douglas F3D Skyknight was selected over Grumman's G-75, a two-seater powered by four Westinghouse J30s. The Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) also issued a contract to Grumman for two G-75 prototype aircraft on 11 April 1946, in case the Skyknight ran into problems.

However, Grumman soon realized that the G-75 was a dead end. But the company had been working on a completely different day fighter, the G-79, which offered a higher potential. In order to keep Grumman in the US Navy’s procurement loop, BuAer, in a bureaucratic maneuver, did not cancel the G-75 contract, but changed the wording to include prototypes of the entirely different G-79, too.

 

The G-79 project comprised a total of four different layouts and engine arrangements for a single seat fighter aircraft. G-79A and B were traditional tail sitters, but both featured mixed propulsion for an enhanced performance: G-79A was powered by an R-2800 radial engine and a Rolls Royce Derwent VI jet booster in the tail, fed by a pair of dorsal air intakes behind the cockpit. The G-79B was a similar aircraft, but its primary engine was a General Electric TG-100 turboprop in a more slender nose section. Even though both designs were big aircraft, initial calculations indicated a performance that would be superior to the Grumman F8F Bearcat, which had been designed as a thoroughbred interceptor.

 

The other two designs were pure jet fighters, both with a tricycle landing gear. G-79C had a layout reminiscent of the Gloster Meteor and was powered by two Derwent VI engines in bulky wing nacelles, and G-79D was finally an overall smaller and lighter aircraft, similar in its outlines to the early Vought F6U Pirate, and powered by a single Nene in the rear fuselage, fed by air intakes in the wing roots.

 

Since the operation of jet-powered aircraft from carriers was terra incognita for the US Navy, and early turbojets thirsty and slow to react to throttle input, BuAer decided to develop two of Grumman's G-79 designs into prototypes for real life evaluation: one of the conservative designs, as a kind of safe route, and one of the more modern jets.

From the mixed propulsion designs, the turboprop-powered G-79B was chosen (becoming the XF9F-1 'JetCat'), since it was expected to offer a higher performance and development potential than the radial-powered 'A'. From the pure jet designs the G-79D was chosen, because of its simplicity and compact size, and designated XF9F-2 'Panther'.

 

The first JetCat prototype made its maiden flight on 26 October 1947, but it was only a short airfield circuit since the TG-100 turpoprop failed to deliver full power and the jet booster had not been installed yet. The prototype Panther, piloted by test pilot Corky Meyer, first flew on 21 November 1947 without major problems.

 

In the wake of the two aircrafts' test program, several modifications and improvements were made. This included an equal armament of four 20mm guns (mounted in the outer, foldable wings on the JetCat and, respectively, in the Panther’s nose). Furthermore, both aircraft were soon armed with underwing HVAR air-to-ground rockets and bombs, and the JetCat even received an underfuselage pylon for the potential carriage of an airborne torpedo. Since there was insufficient space within the foldable wings and the fuselage in both aircraft for the thirsty jet’s fuel, permanently mounted wingtip fuel tanks were added on both aircraft, which incidentally improved the fighters' rate of roll. Both F9F types were cleared for flight from aircraft carriers in September 1949.

 

The F9F-1 was soon re-engined with an Allison T38 turboprop, which was much more reliable than the TF-100 (in the meantime re-designated XT31) and delivered a slightly higher power output. Another change was made for the booster: the bulky Derwent VI engine from the prototype stage was replaced by a much more compact Westinghouse J34 turbojet, which not only delivered slightly more thrust, it also used up much less internal space which was used for radio and navigation equipment, a life raft and a relocated oil tank. Due to a resulting CG shift towards the nose, the fuselage fuel cell layout had to be revised. As a consequence, the cockpit was moved 3’ backwards, slightly impairing the pilot’s field of view, but it was still superior to the contemporary Vought F4U.

 

Despite the engine improvements, though, the F9F-1 attained markedly less top speed than the F9F-2. On the other side, it had a better rate of climb and slow speed handling characteristics, could carry more ordnance and offered a considerably bigger range and extended loiter time. The F9F-2 was more agile, though, and more of the nimble dogfighter the US Navy was originally looking for. Its simplicity with just a single engine was appealing, too.

 

The Panther was eventually favored as the USN's first operational jet day fighter and put into production, but the F9F-1 showed much potential as a fast fighter bomber. Through pressure from the USMC, who was looking for a replacement for its F7F heavy Tigercat fighters, a production order for 50 JetCats was eventually placed, later augmented to 82 aircraft because the US Navy also recognized the type’s potential as a fast, ship-borne multi-role fighter. Further interest came in 1949 from Australia, when the country’s government was looking for a - possibly locally-built in license - replacement for the outdated Mustang Mk 23 and De Havilland Vampire then operated by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). Both Grumman designs were potential contenders, rivalling with the domestic CAC CA-23 fighter development.

 

The Grumman Panther became the most widely used U.S. Navy jet fighter of the Korean War, flying 78,000 sorties and scoring the first air-to-air kill by the U.S. Navy in the war, the downing of a North Korean Yakovlev Yak-9 fighter. Being rugged aircraft, F9F-2s, -3s and -5s were able to sustain operations, even in the face of intense anti-aircraft fire. The pilots also appreciated the Panther’s air conditioned cockpit, which was a welcome change from the humid environment of piston-powered aircraft.

 

The F9F-1 did fare less glamorous. Compared with the prototypes, the T38 turboprop's power output could be enhanced on service aircraft, but not on a significant level. The aircraft's original, rather sluggish response to throttle input and its low-speed handling were improved through an eight-blade contraprop, which, as a side benefit, countered torque problems during starts and landings on carriers.

The JetCat’s mixed powerplant installation remained capricious, though, and the second engine and its fuel meant a permanent weight penalty. The aircraft's complexity turned out to be a real weak point during the type's deployment to front line airfields in the Korean War, overall readiness was – compared with conservative types like the F4U and also the F9F-2, low. Despite the turboprop improvements, the jet booster remained necessary for carrier starts and vital in order to take on the MiG-15 or post-war piston engine types of Soviet origin like the Lavochkin La-9 and -11 or the Yakowlev Yak-9.

 

Frequent encounters with these opponents over Korea confirmed that the F9F-1 was not a “naturally born” dogfighter, but rather fell into the escort fighter or attack aircraft class. In order to broaden the type's duty spectrum, a small number of USMC and USN F9F-1s was modified in field workshops with an APS-6 type radar equipment from F4U-4N night fighters. Similar to the Corsair, the radar dish was carried in a streamlined pod under the outer starboard wing. The guns received flame dampers, and these converted machines, re-designated F9F-1N, were used with mild success as night and all-weather fighters.

 

However, the JetCat remained unpopular among its flight and ground crews and, after its less-than-satisfactory performance against MiGs, quickly retired. After the end of the Korean War in July 1953, all machines were grounded and by 1954 all had been scrapped. However, the turboprop-powered fighter bomber lived on with the USMC, which ordered the Vought A3U SeaScorpion as successor.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 40 ft 5 in (12,31 m)

Wingspan: 43 ft 5 in (13,25 m)

Height: 15 ft 6 3/4 in (4,75 m)

Wing area: 250 ft² (23 m²)

Empty weight: 12,979 lb (5,887 kg)

Gross weight: 24,650 lb (11,181 kg)

Powerplant:

1× Allison T38E turboprop, rated at 2,500 shp (1,863 kW) plus 600 lbf (2.7 kN) residual thrust

1× Westinghouse J34-WE-13 turbojet booster with 3,000 lbf (13.35 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 507 mph (441 kn; 816 km/h) at 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

497 mph (432 kn, 800 km/h) at sea level

Cruise speed: 275 mph (443 km/h; 239 kn) at 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Stall speed: 74 mph (119 km/h; 64 kn) with flaps

Range: 2,500 mi (2,172 nmi; 4,023 km)

Service ceiling: 47,000 ft (14,000 m)

Rate of climb: 5,300 ft/min (27 m/s)

Wing loading: 71 lb/ft² (350 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.42

Armament:

4× 20 mm (0.79 in) AN/M3 cannon in the outer, foldable wings with 220 RPG

Underwing hardpoints and provisions to carry combinations of up to 6× 5 " (127 mm) HVAR

missiles and/or bombs on underwing hardpoints, for a total ordnance of 3,000 lb (1,362 kg)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is another submission to the Cold War GB at whatifmodelers in early 2018, and rather a spontaneous idea. It was actually spawned after I finished my fictional Gudkov Gu-1 mixed propulsion fighter - while building (using the engine front from an F6F Hellcat) I had the impression that it could also have ended up as a post-war USN fighter design.

 

A couple of days later, while browsing literature for inspiration, I came across Grumman's G-79 series of designs that eventually led to the F9F Panther - and I was amazed that the 'A' design almost looked like my kitbashed Soviet fighter!

 

So I considered a repeated build of a P-47D/Supermarine Attacker kitbash, just in American colors. But with the F9F relationship, I planned the integration of Panther parts, so that the new creation would look different from the Gu-1, but also show some (more) similarity to the Panther.

 

The plan appeared feasible. Again, the aircraft's core is an Academy P-47D, with its outer wings cut off. Cockpit and landing gear were retained. However, instead of Supermarine Attacker wings from a Novo kit, I attached F9F-2 wings from a Hasegawa kit. Shape-wise this worked fine, but the Panther wings are much thinner than the Thunderbolt’s, so that I had to integrate spacers inside of the intersections which deepen the Hasegawa parts. Not perfect, but since the type would feature folding wings, the difference and improvisation is not too obvious.

 

On the fuselage, the Thunderbolt’s air outlets on its flanks were faired over and most of the tail section cut away. In the lower part of the tail, a jet pipe (from a Heller F-84G) was added and blended with PSR into the Thunderbolt fuselage, similar to the Gu-1. A completely new fin was scratched from an outer wing section from a Heinkel He 189, in an attempt to copy the G-79B's shape according to the drawing I used as benchmark for the build. I also used the F9F's stabilizers. With clipped tips they match well in size and shape, and add to the intended Grumman family look. The original tail wheel well was retained, but the tail wheel was placed as far back as possible and replaced by the twin wheel from a Hasegawa F5U. The Panther’s OOB tail hook was integrated under the jet pipe, too.

 

The front section is completely different and new, and my choice fell on the turboprop-powered G-79B because I did not want to copy the Gu-1 with its radial engine. However, the new turboprop nose was not less complicated to build. Its basis is a 1:100 engine and contraprop from a VEB Plasticart Tu-20/95 bomber, a frequent ingredient in my builds because it works so well in 1:72 scale. This slender core was attached to the Thunderbolt's fuselage, and around this basis a new cowling was built up with 2C putty, once more in an attempt to mimic the original G-79B design as good as possible.

 

In order to blend the new engine with the fuselage and come close to the G-79B’s vaguely triangular fuselage diameter, the P-47's deep belly was cut away, faired over with styrene sheet, and everything blended into each other with more PSR work. As a final step, two exhaust pipes were mounted to the lower fuselage in front of the wings’ leading edge.

 

The air intakes for the jet booster are actually segments from a Sopwith Triplane fuselage (Revell) – an unlikely source, but the shape of the parts was just perfect. More PSR was necessary to blend them into the aircraft’s flanks, though.

  

Painting and markings:

As per usual, I'd rather go with conservative markings on a fictional aircraft. Matching the Korean War era, the aircraft became all-over FS 35042 (Modelmaster). A black ink wash emphasized the partly re-engraved panel lines, and some post shading highlighted panels.

 

The wings’ leading edges and the turboprop’s intake were painted with aluminum, similar edges on fin and stabilizers were created with silver decal material. The interior of cockpit and landing gear was painted with green chromate primer.

 

The markings were puzzled together. “Stars and Bars” and VF-53 markings were taken from a Hobby Boss F4U-4 kit. The blue fin tip is the marking for the 3rd squadron, so that the “307” tactical code is plausible, too (the latter comes from a Hobby Boss F9F-2). In order to keep things subtle and more business-like (after all, the aircraft is supposed to be operated during the ongoing Korean War), I did not carry the bright squadron color to any other position like the spinner or the wing tips.

 

After some final detail work and gun and exhaust soot stains, the kit was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (Italeri). Matt acrylic varnish was used for weathering effects, so that the aircraft would not look too clean and shiny.

  

While it is not a prefect recreation of the Grumman G-79B, I am quite happy with the result. The differences between the model and the original design sketch can be explained through serial production adaptations, and overall the whole thing looks pretty conclusive. In fact, the model appears from certain angles like a naval P-51 on steroids, even though the G-79B was a much bigger aircraft than the Mustang.

So this morning I received a nice message from Chris Elliot telling me that my VW Golf was on the Popular Mechanics website! *cough*Among other cars*ahem* Needless to say, I'm crazy excited. Thanks Chris! And thanks Popular Mechanics! :D

 

If you haven't seen, my Golf is on the Lego Ideas website. Go show it some support and it could become a real set. Made of reality and realness. But mostly acrylonitrile butadiene styrene.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Supermarine Seafire was a naval version of the Supermarine Spitfire adapted for operation from aircraft carriers. It was analogous in concept to the Hawker Sea Hurricane, a navalized version of the Spitfire's stablemate, the Hawker Hurricane. The name Seafire was derived from the abbreviation of the longer name Sea Spitfire.

 

The idea of adopting a navalized, carrier-capable version of the Supermarine Spitfire had been mooted by the Admiralty as early as May 1938. Despite a pressing need to replace various types of obsolete aircraft that were still in operation with the Fleet Air Arm (FAA), some opposed the notion, such as Winston Churchill, although these disputes were often a result of an overriding priority being placed on maximizing production of land-based Spitfires instead. During 1941 and early 1942, the concept was again pushed for by the Admiralty, culminating in an initial batch of Seafire Mk Ib fighters being provided in late 1941, which were mainly used for pilots to gain experience operating the type at sea. While there were concerns over the low strength of its undercarriage, which had not been strengthened like many naval aircraft would have been, its performance was found to be acceptable.

 

From 1942 onwards, further Seafire models were quickly ordered, including the first operationally-viable Seafire F Mk III variant. This led to the type rapidly spreading throughout the FAA. In November 1942, the first combat use of the Seafire occurred during Operation Torch, the Allied landings in North Africa. In July 1943, the Seafire was used to provide air cover for the Allied invasion of Sicily; and reprised this role in September 1943 during the subsequent Allied invasion of Italy. During 1944, the type was again used in quantity to provide aerial support to Allied ground forces during the Normandy landings and Operation Dragoon in Southern France. During the latter half of 1944, the Seafire became a part of the aerial component of the British Pacific Fleet, where it quickly proved to be a capable interceptor against the feared kamikaze attacks by Japanese pilots which had become increasingly common during the final years of the Pacific War. Several Seafire variants were produced during WWII, more or less mirroring the development of its land-based ancestor.

 

The Seafire continued to be used for some time after the end of the war, and new, dedicated versions were developed and exported. The FAA opted to promptly withdraw all of its Merlin-powered Seafires and replace them with Griffon-powered counterparts. The type saw further active combat use during the Korean War, in which FAA Seafires performed hundreds of missions in the ground attack and combat air patrol roles against North Korean forces during 1950. The Seafire was withdrawn from FAA service during the 1950s and was replaced by the newer Hawker Sea Fury, the last piston engine fighter to be used by the service, along with the first generation of jet-propelled naval fighters, such as the de Havilland Vampire, Supermarine Attacker, and Hawker Sea Hawk.

 

After WWII, the Royal Canadian Navy and French Aviation Navale also obtained Seafires to operate from ex-Royal Navy aircraft carriers. France received a total of 140 Seafires of various versions from 1946 on, including 114 Seafire Mk IIIs in two tranches (35 of them were set aside for spare part) until 1948, and these were followed in 1949 by fifteen Mk. 15 fighters and twelve FR Mk. 23 armed photo reconnaissance aircraft. Additionally, twenty land-based Mk. IXs were delivered to Naval Air Station Cuers-Pierrefeu as trainers.

 

The Seafire Mk. 23 was a dedicated post-war export version. It combined several old and new features and was the final “new” Spitfire variant to be powered by a Merlin engine, namely a Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M with 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) that drove a four-blade propeller. The Mk. 23 was originally built as a fighter (as Seafire F Mk. 23), but most machines were delivered or later converted with provisions for being fitted with two F24 cameras in the rear fuselage and received the service designation FR Mk. 23 (or just FR.23). Only 32 of this interim post-war version were built by Cunliffe-Owen, and all of them were sold to foreign customers.

 

Like the Seafire 17, the 23 had a cut-down rear fuselage and teardrop canopy, which afforded a better all-round field of view than the original cockpit. The windscreen was modified, too, to a rounded section, with narrow quarter windows, rather than the flat windscreen used on land-based Spitfires. As a novel feature the Seafire 23 featured a "sting" arrestor hook instead of the previous V-shaped ventral arrangement.

The fuel capacity was 120 gal (545 l) distributed in two main forward fuselage tanks: the lower tank carried 48 gal (218 l) while the upper tank carried 36 gal (163 l), plus two fuel tanks built into the leading edges of the wings with capacities of 12.5 (57 l) and 5.5 gal (25 l) respectively. It featured a reinforced main undercarriage with longer oleos and a lower rebound ratio, a measure to tame the deck behavior of the Mk. 15 and reducing the propensity of the propeller tips "pecking" the deck during an arrested landing. The softer oleos also stopped the aircraft from occasionally bouncing over the arrestor wires and into the crash barrier.

The wings were taken over from the contemporary Spitfire 21 and therefore not foldable. However, this saved weight and complexity, and the Seafire’s compact dimensions made this flaw acceptable for its operators. The wings were furthermore reinforced, with a stronger main spar necessitated by the new undercarriage, and as a bonus they were able to carry heavier underwing loads than previous Seafire variants. This made the type not only suitable for classic dogfighting (basic armament consisted of four short-barreled 20 mm Hispano V cannon in the outer wings), but also for attack missions with bombs and unguided rockets.

 

The Seafire’s Aéronavale service was quite short, even though they saw hot battle duty. 24 Mk. IIIs were deployed on the carrier Arromanches in 1948 when it sailed for Vietnam to fight in the First Indochina War. The French Seafires operated from land bases and from Arromanches on ground attack missions against the Viet Minh before being withdrawn from combat operations in January 1949.

After returning to European waters, the Aéronavale’s Seafire frontline units were re-equipped with the more modern and capable Seafire 15s and FR 23s, but these were also quickly replaced by Grumman F6F Hellcats from American surplus stock, starting already in 1950. The fighters were retired from carrier operations and soon relegated to training and liaison duties, and eventually scrapped. However, the FR.23s were at this time the only carrier-capable photo reconnaissance aircraft in the Aéronavale’s ranks, so that these machines remained active with Flottille 1.F until 1955, but their career was rather short, too, and immediately ended when the first naval jets became available and raised the performance bar.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 31 ft 10 in (9.70 m)

Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)

Height: 12 ft 9 in (3.89 m) tail down with propeller blade vertical

Wing area: 242.1 ft² (22.5 m²)

Empty weight: 5,564 lb (2,524 kg)

Gross weight: 7,415 lb (3,363 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine,

delivering 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) at 11,000 ft and driving a 4-bladed constant-speed propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 404 mph (650 km/h) at 21,000 ft (6,400 m)

Cruise speed: 272 mph (438 km/h, 236 kn)

Range: 493 mi (793 km) on internal fuel at cruising speed

965 mi (1,553 km) with 90 gal drop tank

Service ceiling: 42,500 ft (12,954 m)

Rate of climb: 4,745 ft/min (24.1 m/s) at 10,000 ft (3,048 m)

Time to altitude: 20,000 ft (6,096 m) in 8 minutes 6 seconds

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm Hispano V cannon; 175 rpg inboard, 150 rpg outboard

Hardpoints for up to 2× 250 lb (110 kg) bombs (outer wings), plus 1× 500 lb (230 kg) bomb

(ventral hardpoint) or drop tanks, or up to 8× "60 lb" RP-3 rockets on zero-length launchers

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was another attempt to reduce The Stash. The basis was a Special Hobby FR Mk. 47, which I had originally bought as a donor kit: the engine housing bulges of its Griffon engine were transplanted onto a racing P-51D Mustang. Most of the kit was still there, and from this basis I decided to create a fictional post-WWII Seafire/Spitfire variant.

 

With the Griffon fairings gone a Merlin engine was settled, and the rest developed spontaneously. The propeller was improvised, with a P-51D spinner (Academy kit) and blades from the OOB 5-blade propeller, which are slightly deeper than the blades from the Spitfire Mk. IX/XVI prop. In order to attach it to the hull and keep it movable, I implanted my standard metal axis/styrene tube arrangement.

 

With the smaller Merlin engine, I used the original, smaller Spitfire stabilizers but had to use the big, late rudder, due to the taller fin of the post-ware Spit-/Seafire models. The four-spoke wheels also belong to an earlier Seafire variant. Since it was an option in the kit, I went for a fuselage with camera openings (the kit comes with two alternative fuselages as well as a vast range of optional parts for probably ANY late Spit- and Seafire variant – and also for many fictional hybrids!), resulting in a low spine and a bubble canopy, what gives the aircraft IMHO very sleek and elegant lines. In order to maintain this impression I also used the short cannon barrels from the kit. For extended range on recce missions I furthermore gave the model the exotic underwing slipper tanks instead of the optional missile launch rail stubs under the outer wing sections. Another mod is the re-installment of the small oil cooler under the left wing root from a Spitfire Mk. V instead of the symmetrical standard radiator pair – just another subtle sign that “something’s not right” here.

  

Painting and markings:

The decision to build this model as a French aircraft was inspired by a Caracal Decals set with an Aéronavale Seafire III from the Vietnam tour of duty in 1948, an aircraft with interesting roundels that still carried British FAA WWII colors (Dark Slate Grey/Dark Sea Grey, Sky). Later liveries of the type remain a little obscure, though, and information about them is contradictive. Some profiles show French Seafires in British colors, with uniform (Extra) Dark Sea Grey upper and Sky lower surfaces, combined with a high waterline – much like contemporary FAA aircraft like the Sea Fury. However, I am a bit in doubt concerning the Sky, because French naval aircraft of that era, esp. recce types like the Shorts Sunderland or PBY Catalina, were rather painted in white or very light grey, just with uniform dark grey upper surfaces, reminding of British Coastal Command WWII aircraft.

 

Since this model would be a whif, anyway, and for a pretty look, I adopted the latter design, backed by an undated profile of a contemporary Seafire Mk. XV from Flottille S.54, a training unit, probably from the Fifties - not any valid guarantee for authenticity, but it looks good, if not elegant!

Another option from that era would have been an all-blue USN style livery, which should look great on a Spitfire, too. But I wanted something more elegant and odd, underpinning the bubbletop Seafire’s clean lines.

 

I settled for Extra Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 123) and Light Grey (FS. 36495, Humbrol 147) as basic tones, with a very high waterline. The spinner was painted yellow, the only colorful marking. Being a post-war aircraft of British origin, the cockpit interior was painted in black (Revell 09, anthracite). The landing gear wells became RAF Cockpit Green (Humbrol 78), while the inside of the respective covers became Sky (Humbrol 90) – reflecting the RAF/FAA’s post-war practice of applying the external camouflage paint on these surfaces on Spit-/Seafires, too. On this specific aircraft the model displays, just the exterior had been painted over by the new operator. Looks weird, but it’s a nice detail.

 

The roundels came from the aforementioned 1948 Seafire Mk. III, and their odd design – esp. the large ones on the wings, and only the fuselage roundels carry the Aéronavale’s anchor icon and a yellow border – creates a slightly confusing look. Unfortunately, the roundels were not 100% opaque, this became only apparent after their application, and they did not adhere well, either.

The tactical code had to be improvised with single, black letters of various sizes – they come from a Hobby Boss F4F USN pre-WWII Wildcat, but were completely re-arrenged into the French format. The fin flash on the rudder had to be painted, with red and blue paint, in an attempt to match the decals’ tones, and separated by a white decal stripe. The anchor icon on the rudder had to be printed by myself, unfortunately the decal on the bow side partly disintegrated. Stencils were taken from the Special Hobby kit’s OOB sheet.

 

The model received a light black ink washing, post-panel shading with dry-brushing and some soot stains around the exhausts, but not too much weathering, since it would be relatively new. Finally, everything was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A relatively quick and simple build, and the Special Hobby kit went together with little problems – a very nice and versatile offering. The mods are subtle, but I like the slender look of this late Spitfire model, coupled with the elegant Merlin engine – combined into the fictional Mk. 23. The elegant livery just underlines the aircraft’s sleek lines. Not spectacular, but a pretty result.

 

+++ 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 BAC Jet Provost was a British jet trainer aircraft that was in use with the Royal Air Force (RAF) from 1955 to 1993. It was originally developed by Hunting Percival from the earlier piston engine-powered Percival Provost basic trainer, and later produced by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC). In addition to the multiple RAF orders, the Jet Provost, sometimes with light armament, was exported to many air forces worldwide. The design was also further developed into a more heavily armed ground attack variant under the name BAC Strikemaster, which was not operated by the Royal Air Force but became a worldwide export success.

 

The Jet Provost was produced for the Royal Air Force in several variants with gradually stronger engines and other detail improvements, the first trainers entered RAF service in 1955. A major development step was the T.5 variant in 1967 with a pressurized cabin, a modified front section and the option for export customers to arm it with machine guns and underwing hardpoints. The T.5 was fitted with the Viper 201 or 202 turbojet engine and its versatility encouraged the RAF to utilize the Jet Provost in more roles besides basic training. With a top speed of 440 mph, excellent maneuverability, mechanical reliability and low operating costs, the Jet Provost was utilized as an aerobatic aircraft, for air warfare and tactical weapons training as well as for advanced training. T.5 deliveries from BAC's Warton factory commenced on 3 September 1969, and operators of the type included the RAFs Central Flying School and No. 1, No. 3, and No. 6 Flying Training Schools. During their career the T.5s were modified with improved avionics and a rough coating on the wing to break up the smooth airflow and give the trainee pilot an early indication of the onset of a stall (the T.5's original clean wing gave the pilot little warning); upgraded aircraft were re- designated T.5A. A sub-variant, unofficially designated T.5B, was a small number of T.5As fitted with wingtip-tanks (so far only used by export customers) and special equipment for long-range low-level navigator training.

 

During the Mid-Eighties the RAF started to look for a more economical successor for the aging Jet Provost fleet, and this eventually became the turbo-prop Shorts Tucano. The Tucano was selected in 1985 in preference to the Swiss Pilatus PC-9 and the British Hunting Firecracker. The first Tucano flew in Brazil on 14 February 1986, with the first Shorts built production aircraft flying on 30 December 1986. However, problems with the ejection seats delayed the introduction of the aircraft into service until 1989. During this period the Jet Provost remained the RAF’s mainstay trainer, but it was gradually withdrawn from RAF service, mostly due to many airframes’ age. However, late in their career a handful of these robust aircraft eventually saw frontline use and were deployed in a hot conflict during the first Gulf War, in an unexpected but important role that paved the way for new air strike tactics.

 

When the RAF took part in combat operations during Operation Granby/Desert Storm in 1991, it had been anticipated that complex and fast attack aircraft like the Tornado would autonomously perform air strikes, either with iron bombs against area targets or with precision weapons like laser-guided glide bombs against important or small objects. However, early experience from the front lines showed that deploying precision weapons was not easy: target acquisition and then both target designation and weapon deployment were not feasible with just a single aircraft – it would be exposed to potential enemy fire for too long or require two or more passes over the target, so that any surprise moment was ruined. During the early stages of the RAF’s air raids a strike group of six aircraft would require two of them to act as dedicated target designators, selecting and illuminating targets with laser projectors for other aircraft. Another problem was that these scouts had to fly ahead of the strike force, check out the battlefield and loiter at relatively slow speed in hostile environment until the fast strike aircraft would arrive and drop their weapons. “Wasting” Tornados and their strike capability for these FAC duties was regarded as inefficient, and an alternative aircraft that was better suited for this task was chosen: the vintage but small and nimble Jet Provost T.5A!

 

Early on, this had been thought to be "unlikely”, but following a short-notice decision to deploy, the first batch of six aircraft were readied to deploy in under 72 hours. These were dedicated long-range navigational trainers, operated by 79(R) Squadron as part of No. 229 Operational Conversion Unit, and the aircraft were hastily prepared for their unusual mission. This included the removal of the aerodynamic wing coating to improve the flight characteristics again, the adoption of desert camouflage, mounting of underwing hardpoints and additional equipment like an encrypted radio with better range and navigation systems (including a GPS sensor in a spinal fairing). As protective measures, Kevlar mats were added to the cockpit floor and lower side walls, as well as a passive radar warning system with sensors on nose and fin and chaff/flare dispensers under the rear fuselage. A fixed refueling probe was considered for the transfer flight and to extend loiter time during missions via air-to-air refueling, but this was not realized due to the lack of time.

To mark their special status the machines were (now officially) designated T(R).5B. They departed from RAF Brawdy in Wales for the Middle Eastern theatre early on 26 January 1991. Upon arrival the machines were immediately thrown into action. It now became common for each attack formation to comprise four Tornados or Jaguars and two Jet Provosts; each Jet Provost carried a 144-inch-long (3.66 m), 420-lb (209 kg) AN/AVQ-23E ‘Pave Spike’ laser designator pod on one of the outer underwing stations and acted as backup to the other in the event of an equipment malfunction. The machines would typically not carry offensive loads, except for occasional unguided SNEB missiles to visually mark potential targets, since they did not have a sufficient load-carrying capacity, but they were frequently equipped with drop tanks to extend their range and loiter time, and “Dash 10” (AN/ALQ-101) ECM pods to counter radar-guided weapons against them.

 

The first combat mission already took place on 2 February 1991, operating at a medium altitude of roughly 18,000 feet (5,500 m), and successfully attacked the As Suwaira Road Bridge. Operations continued, practically every available day, even though missions did not take place at night as the RAF’s ’Pave Spike’ pods (a simplified version of the American AN/ASQ-153) lacked night-time functionality. After the first missions the Jet Provosts received black anti-glare-panels in front of the windscreen – they had been re-painted in the UK without them, and the black panel markedly reduced the camouflage’s efficiency, but the strong and constant sunshine reflection from the Jet Provosts’ bulged nose frequently blinded the crews. Another retrofitted feature was the addition of a video camera to document the targeting missions, which was mounted in a shallow blister on top of the nose, just above the landing light cluster.

 

When the tactical separation of target designation and strike missions proved to be successful, more and more potent aircraft were sent into the theatre of operations, namely the RAF’s Blackburn Buccaneer, which replaced the Jet Provosts on long-range missions and also carried out strike and dive-bombing missions. Approximately 20 road bridges were destroyed with the help of the target spotter aircraft, restricting the Iraqi Army's mobility and communications. In conjunction with the advance of Coalition ground forces into Iraq, the Buccaneers switched to airfield bombing missions, targeting bunkers, runways, and any aircraft sighted on the ground, while the Jet Provosts were used over less dangerous terrain and closer to the air bases, primarily acting as artillery spotters. However, the designator pods were still carried to mark targets of opportunity and strike aircraft were then called in to eliminate them.

 

The Jet Provost T(R).5Bs took part in 186 missions during the Gulf War. Two from the total of eight deployed Jet Provosts were lost during their short active career: One was shot down at low level by a MANPADS (probably an IR-guided 9K38 Igla/SA-18 Grouse), both crew members were lost; the other crashed due a failure of the hydraulic system but could be brought down over friendly terrain and the crew ejected safely.

After their return to Great Britain the worn machines were quickly phased out and all T(R).5Bs were retired when 79(R) Squadron was disbanded in August 1992. The last Jet Provosts in RAF service were retired in 1993.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)

Wingspan: 35 ft 4 in (10.77 m) with wingtip tanks

Height: 10 ft 2 in (3.10 m)

Wing area: 213.7 sq ft (19.85 m²)

Airfoil: root: NACA 23015 mod; tip: NACA 4412 mod

Empty weight: 4,888 lb (2,217 kg)

Gross weight: 6,989 lb (3,170 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 9,200 lb (4,173 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Armstrong Siddeley Viper Mk.202 turbojet engine, 2,500 lbf (11,1 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 382 kn (440 mph, 707 km/h) at 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Range: 780 nmi (900 mi, 1,440 km) with tip tanks

Service ceiling: 36,750 ft (11,200 m)

Rate of climb: 4,000 ft/min (20 m/s)

Wing loading: 32.7 lb/sq ft (160 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

No internal guns;

4× underwing hardpoints, each capable of carrying 540 lb (245 kg), for a wide range of loads,

including bombs, pods and launch rails with unguided missiles, gun pods;

the inner pair of pylons were plumbed for auxiliary tanks.

The T( R).5B was outfitted with an AN/AVQ-23E Pave Spike laser designator pod and an AN/ALQ-101

ECM pod on the outer stations, plus a pair of 75 Imp gallon (341 liter) drop tanks or pods with 28

unguided SNEB missiles on the inner pylons

  

The kit and its assembly:

This fictional Gulf War participant was a spontaneous decision to build – actually as a group build submission, but it turned out to be ineligible. After fellow user SPINNERS posted one of his CG skins, a grey RAF low-viz Jet Provost at whatifmodellers.com, I suggested in the respective thread a machine in Desert Pink – and it was promptly realized, including equipment from the Gulf War Buccaneers and LGBs as ordnance. Inspiration enough to dig out an Airfix kit out of The Stash™ for which I had no concrete plan yet and turn the CG rendition into hardware.

 

The kit is a simple affair and shows its age through (light) flash and shaggy fit around the seams almost everywhere. Nothing dramatic, but you have to invest time and PSR effort. And it features the most complicated landing light arrangement I have ever come across: five(!) single parts if you include the front cover. Why the mold designer did not just provide a single clear piece with three lens-shaped dents at the back - and instead went for a bulkhead, three(!) separate and tiny clear lenses PLUS a clear cover that is supposed to fit in a rather dysmorphic nose opening is beyond me?

 

The kit was basically built OOB, using the Jet Provost T.5 air intakes and fuselage details but the Strikemaster wing tip tanks and wing pylons. The Pave Spike pod came from a Hasegawa 1:72 aircraft weapon set, the ECM pod from a Revell 1:72 F-16A (the vintage kit of the prototype with the extra engine) – it is shorter than a typical AN/ALQ-101, rather looks like an AN/ALQ-119, but these pods were all modular and could have different lengths/sizes. And I think that the shorter variant suits the Jet provost well, the Pave Spike pod is already quite long for the small aircraft.

 

Unlike SPINNERS I settled just for drop tanks on the inner wing stations to extend range and loiter time. I also doubt that the Jet Provost had enough carrying capacity and speed for LGBs, and on their target designation missions the RAF Buccaneers did AFAIK not carry much offensive ordnance, either. There’s also not much clearance under a Jet Provost on the ground – I doubt that anything with big fins could safely go under it? However, for a modernized look I replaced the Jet Provost’s OOB teardrop-shaped tanks with cigar-shaped alternatives.

 

Further mods were only of cosmetic nature: the seats received ejection handles made from thin wire, the characteristic chines under the nose were omitted (the kit’s parts are rather robust, and they were left away on some T.5s in real life, anyway), and I scratched small conformal chaff/flare dispensers from styrene profile and put them under the lower rear fuselage. Fairings for a radar-warning system were scratched from 1.5 mm styrene rods, too, some blade antennae were added around the hull, and sprue material was used to create the GPS antenna “bubble” behind the cockpit. The shallow camera bulge on the nose was created in a similar fashion.

 

Another problem: the model is seriously tail-heavy. I filled the chamber between the odd landing lights compartment and the cockpit with lead beads, but once the landing gear had been attached the model still sat on its tail. I was lucky that I had not glued the seats into place yet, so I was able to add more ballast in front of the main wheels, therewith creating a bulkhead (which is missing OOB) behind the seats, what was eventually enough to shift the model’s center of gravity forward.

  

Painting and markings:

Desert Pink was the driving theme for this build (to be correct, it’s FS 30279 “Desert Sand”). While real RAF aircraft from Operation Granby were painted all-over with this tone (and SPINNERS did the same with the CG rendition), I wanted a bit more variety and just painted the upper surfaces and the underside of the leading edges, the inside of the air intakes and the tip tanks in the sand tone, while the undersides were painted in RAF Barley Grey (Humbrol 167), as if an late all-grey low-viz trainer had been painted over just on the upper surfaces.

For the Desert Pink I was able to use the authentic tone, I had a virgin tin of Humbrol 250 in my enamels hoard that now found a good use. After basic painting the kit received an overall black in washing, dry-brushing with Revell 35 (Skin – it’s a perfect match for panel post-shading!) to retain the pinkish hue and, after the decals had been applied, a bit of grinded graphite to simulate wear and dirt and emphasize the raised surface details.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Anthracite (Revell 06), the dashboard became medium grey with dark instruments (not painted, thanks to the raised details I simple rubbed some graphite over it, and the effect is nice!). The ejection seats became tar black with grey-green cushions. The landing gear was painted in Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165).

The drop tanks became Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165) and Barley Grey, as if they had been procured from a different aircraft, while the Pave Spike pod and the ECM pod were both in RAF Dark Green (Humbrol 163), for good contrast to the rest of the model.

 

Decals/markings come from Xtradecal sheets. The low-viz roundels were taken from a dedicated RAF roundel sheet because I wanted a uniform roundel size (in six positions) and slightly darker print colors. Unit markings and tactical codes came from a Jet Provost/Strikemaster sheet, also from Xtradecal; RAF 79 Squadron actually operated the Jet provost, but AFAIK only the T.4 version, but not the pressurized T.5 or even the T.5A navigator trainers. The nose art at bow side came from a USN EA-6B Prowler.

 

After some final details (position lights), the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A quick project, and the Operation Granby Jet Provost looks better than expected. However, I am not sold on the vintage Airfix kit. It clearly shows its age, nothing really went together smoothly, gaps and sinkholes, PSR on every seam. It also required tons of nose weight to keep it on its spindly legs. The alternative Matchbox kit is not much better, though, with even more simple surface and cockpit details, but at least the parts fit together. I might try to hunt down a Sword kit if I should want to build one again, AFAIK the only other IP option? The result looks interesting, though, quite purposeful with its low-viz markings, and the simple livery turns out to be very effective over the desert terrain where it would have been supposed to operate. Furthermore, the model fits well into the Jet Provost’s historic final years of duty with the RAF – even though in an unlikely role!

1 2 ••• 4 5 7 9 10 ••• 79 80