Gloster Meteor U21/U21A drones

[Admiral Puff]

Looking for something different to do with the new Airfix 1:48 Meteor kit when I get my hot and clammies on it, I remembered the U21/U21A article that was published in APMA 4/1989 (and also IPMS-UK magazine 4/1988) and noticed that the Red Roo U21 conversion kit is still available. Although the conversion is intended for the Classic Airframes kit, I doubt that adapting it to the Airfix offering will be difficult, since the main modification involves fitting the extended nose and AMPOR wing tip pods. And those Woomera drones did carry some quite colourful schemes!

However, there is one detail not covered in either iteration of the article. The U21s all had their armament removed; am I correct in assuming that the ammunition trays behind the pilot would also have gone? If so, what would have replaced them - some of the radio control gear? Or would the space simply have been left empty? Any guidance would be most appreciated.

[NAVY870]

I have a U.16/U21 manual in my collection, I'll drag it out and have a look.

I know all the remote control gear went in the aft equipment bay behind the fuel tank.

Nothing in the ammo tank bay

[sloegin57]

These may help. It appears that there was some sort of radio/control equipment in the bays :-

Bays empty :-

Bays Full :-

HTH

Dennis

[bentwaters81tfw]

As you can see they now have guns in them again, I'll ask tonight what was in them when it was collected, although anything useable had already been stripped. This is ex Llanbedr.

Asked tonight. Bays were fitted with electronics and servos for the remote control. The a/c were fully fitted for manual flight as well, right down to the bang seat.

Edited September 10, 2015 by bentwaters81tfw

[Admiral Puff]

Thanks, everyone - that all helps.

[NAVY870]

Unfortunately my manual is in too poor a condition to pull apart for scanning so I'll have

to give you a brief description for now.

In the extended nose compartment there is front to back

Destroy Battery

Destroy receiver

TR2002 Standby VHF

Air Data Unit

Command relay unit

Auto pilot JB

Roll unit.

Port Gun Bay

Elapsed time unit

camera Relay box

Pitot static test unit

Starboard gun bay

Instrumentation recorders

Pitch camera

Ammunition tank bay

Tanks not carried, equipment the as per F.8 with

automatic controls in the hydraulic system for airbrakes flaps etc.

Aileron servo

Aft equipment bay (aft of the fuselage fuel tank)

VHF TX

Telemetry transducer

Telemetry transmitter

Engine speed transducers

Rudder Servo

Elevator servo.

The upshot of this long winded gibbering is that you will need to scratch the ammo tank bay

to do a 21 (good luck) as the tanks arent fitted. Theres a lot of hydraulic lines, junction boxes

and general gubbins down that hole

Heres the same area on our F.8 at Camden Museum of Aviation

And from the book

Edited September 11, 2015 by NAVY870

[Admiral Puff]

Bewdy! Thanks heaps, Steve! Looks like I may have lots of fumbling ahead ...

[Admiral Puff]

Back again ... the Airfix kit has arrived, and I can only endorse what others have said. It's a ripper!

Another question has awoken in what passes for my mind. Did the drones have small or large bore intakes? My references, and Bentwaters' pics above, suggest that most had the small bore ones, but it does seem from some photos I've seen that a few may have had the big ones. Any suggestions?

[Wez]

Back again ... the Airfix kit has arrived, and I can only endorse what others have said. It's a ripper!

Another question has awoken in what passes for my mind. Did the drones have small or large bore intakes? My references, and Bentwaters' pics above, suggest that most had the small bore ones, but it does seem from some photos I've seen that a few may have had the big ones. Any suggestions?

This is something I've pondered over for a mighty long time, the conclusion I've come to is this, large bore intakes were introduced around about point X in production (I'm still trying to find out when that was).

If an aircraft was built with small bore intakes it appeared to retain them during its service life, there doesn't appear to have been a Mod programme to retrofit large bore intakes.

I'm willing to be proved completely and utterly wrong in my conclusion, I'm not saying it's a definitive answer, just a conclusion I've arrived at.

What it boils down to is getting hold a photo of your jet then building that.

[Biggles81]

This is something I've pondered over for a mighty long time, the conclusion I've come to is this, large bore intakes were introduced around about point X in production (I'm still trying to find out when that was).

If an aircraft was built with small bore intakes it appeared to retain them during its service life, there doesn't appear to have been a Mod programme to retrofit large bore intakes.

I'm willing to be proved completely and utterly wrong in my conclusion, I'm not saying it's a definitive answer, just a conclusion I've arrived at.

What it boils down to is getting hold a photo of your jet then building that.

I would have to disagree with that although it may apply to RAF airframes. Certainly there are RAAF Meteor F8s that were retrofitted with large bore intakes during their service life. A77-207 is one example that springs to mind.

[AnonymousAA72]

Back again ... the Airfix kit has arrived, and I can only endorse what others have said. It's a ripper!

Another question has awoken in what passes for my mind. Did the drones have small or large bore intakes? My references, and Bentwaters' pics above, suggest that most had the small bore ones, but it does seem from some photos I've seen that a few may have had the big ones. Any suggestions?

Both! In RAF service any in the WLxxx and WKxxx range of serials had wide breathers. You would need to cross check serials for U.21's.

Edit: I have yet to see hard evidence that Meteors were retro-fitted with wide breather intakes. If anyone does then please pass it on! However, looking through The Gloster Meteor, by Edward Schacklady, it notes that one F8, converted to a U16, namely WK660 (a wide breather) had its wings used on WA982 ( a narrow breather). That may have happened on other airframes?

Regarding the U 21, the book says that eight Meteor F8s were converted by Flight Refuelling, tested and shipped to Australia to Fairey Aviation Austtralasia Ltd where they were re-assembled and tested. FR also provided modification kits to enable Faireys to convert two U16,s already in Oz, namely WE960 and WK 797. It adds that WL136 was the first of the eight converted. Sorry, i don't have a list of their Australian serials ...

Edited April 8, 2016 by Bill Clark

[Selwyn]

Both! In RAF service any in the WLxxx and WKxxx range of serials had wide breathers. You would need to cross check serials for U.21's.

Edit: I have yet to see hard evidence that Meteors were retro-fitted with wide breather intakes. If anyone does then please pass it on! However, looking through The Gloster Meteor, by Edward Schacklady, it notes that one F8, converted to a U16, namely WK660 (a wide breather) had its wings used on WA982 ( a narrow breather). That may have happened on other airframes?

Regarding the U 21, the book says that eight Meteor F8s were converted by Flight Refuelling, tested and shipped to Australia to Fairey Aviation Austtralasia Ltd where they were re-assembled and tested. FR also provided modification kits to enable Faireys to convert two U16,s already in Oz, namely WE960 and WK 797. It adds that WL136 was the first of the eight converted. Sorry, i don't have a list of their Australian serials ...

Which intake type depends on the engines fitted. The wide intakes were related to the Derwent 8 engine.

Apparently it was found by using the wide intake with this mark of engine increased the available thrust of the engine by a whopplng 240 lb, (that an extra 480lb thrust per aircraft) a big performance gain for what was obviously a relatively cheap modification.

Selwyn

Edited April 8, 2016 by Selwyn

[AnonymousAA72]

Which intake type depends on the engines fitted. The wide intakes were related to the Derwent 8 engine.

Apparently it was found by using the wide intake with this mark of engine increased the available thrust of the engine by a whopplng 240 lb, (that an extra 480lb thrust per aircraft) a big performance gain for what was obviously a relatively cheap modification.

Selwyn

Wasn't the Derwent 8 fitted to all Mk.8's , and T7's.........and most of the later marks, regardless of the intakes?

[Wez]

Wasn't the Derwent 8 fitted to all Mk.8's , and T7's.........and most of the later marks, regardless of the intakes?

I thought so too.

[AnonymousAA72]

I thought so too.

Despite trawling through all of my Meteor references, I have yet to find any proof that wide breather intakes were retro-fitted to aircraft to replace narrow breather intakes. I'm sure it may have happened, or maybe it was a wing swap as high-lighted above?

I can understand the rationale behind Selwyn's tack here...a more powerful engine needing more air, however my take on what is written, or what I can find anyway, is that the wider intakes just improved the existing Derwents.

That said, it seems strange then that the opportunity wasn't seized to retro-fit wide breathers! Maybe it wasn't worth it, the type was becoming obsolete with new swept wing fighters being introduced.

It seems clear that some T7's did have wide breathers, and those serials often are outside of the WLxxx and WKxxx serial batches. Bearing in mind the mark,s longevity it could well be that wings were swapped, from redundant F8's, or had the intakes changed.

Interesting stuff......

[Wez]

Which intake type depends on the engines fitted. The wide intakes were related to the Derwent 8 engine.

Apparently it was found by using the wide intake with this mark of engine increased the available thrust of the engine by a whopplng 240 lb, (that an extra 480lb thrust per aircraft) a big performance gain for what was obviously a relatively cheap modification.

Selwyn

Wasn't the Derwent 8 fitted to all Mk.8's , and T7's.........and most of the later marks, regardless of the intakes?

Just checked my references and Bill is correct, the Derwent 8 is specified for all Mk.8's.

I would've expected the RAF to have retrofitted the wide bore intakes, but it seems they didn't.

I'm sure I've got the IPMS UK magazine with the Meteor drones in, I'll see if I can dig it out over the weekend.

[Biggles81]

Despite trawling through all of my Meteor references, I have yet to find any proof that wide breather intakes were retro-fitted to aircraft to replace narrow breather intakes. I'm sure it may have happened, or maybe it was a wing swap as high-lighted above?

I can understand the rationale behind Selwyn's tack here...a more powerful engine needing more air, however my take on what is written, or what I can find anyway, is that the wider intakes just improved the existing Derwents.

That said, it seems strange then that the opportunity wasn't seized to retro-fit wide breathers! Maybe it wasn't worth it, the type was becoming obsolete with new swept wing fighters being introduced.

It seems clear that some T7's did have wide breathers, and those serials often are outside of the WLxxx and WKxxx serial batches. Bearing in mind the mark,s longevity it could well be that wings were swapped, from redundant F8's, or had the intakes changed.

Interesting stuff......

Well for what it's worth, as I said above there is photographic evidence that shows WE905 (A77-207) was retrofitted in RAAF service before becoming a U21A. There are "before and after" photos available on ADF serials. I am sure.a study of other RAAF airframes will turn up other examples.

[Wez]

Well for what it's worth, as I said above there is photographic evidence that shows WE905 (A77-207) was retrofitted in RAAF service before becoming a U21A. There are "before and after" photos available on ADF serials. I am sure.a study of other RAAF airframes will turn up other examples.

Link here http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/ definitely changed from small bore intakes in Korea to wide bore later, what this means is for modelling a U21/U21A you really need to get a photo of the aircraft you're modelling to verify what intakes it had at that particular time.

Interesting that the Aussies changed the intakes but the RAF didn't, I suspect the extra thrust in the higher ambient temperatures came in handy, probably restored the balance.

So it could be done, just the RAF chose not to, I did say I was willing to be corrected!

Thanks for providing the steer.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Wez

[sloegin57]

Interesting that the Aussies changed the intakes but the RAF didn't, I suspect the extra thrust in the higher ambient temperatures came in handy, probably restored the balance.

So it could be done, just the RAF chose not to, I did say I was willing to be corrected!

Who say's that they didn't Wez ?

Like me you obviously been studying the Meteor for sometime - frustrating isn't it !!

Quote from Bryan Philpotts book "Meteor" ref the PR.10 :-

"Some aircraft appeared with small diameter intakes, but these were later modified as was the part metal canopy, to bring the aircraft into line with the F8 and FR9. Once again a Martin Baker 2E type ejection seat was fitted"

I have a feeling that it was more to do with the MCrit speed of the aircraft, pegged at .82 ( thanks to the ongoing aileron problem) and which aircraft with both types of intake could reach, was the governor that determined the fitment of "big breathers". Some Mods on the Meteor appear to have been less popular than others. A Classic that I came across some years ago in correspondence with an ex CFE pilot was that of the windscreen wiper (Mod.1862). It appears that this was tacitly ignored at the request of the aircrew for the simple reason that if the wiper was in use on the final approach and the flaps were selected down, the wiper promptly stopped working and lay flat against the screen right in the middle and thus blocking or partially blocking the pilots view ahead at a critical time. A few T.7's were fitted with it but I have yet to find a photo nor can I remember seeing a single seater fitted with one.

Ballast and ailerons I'll deal with on the relevant threads ( frightening !)

Dennis

Edited April 8, 2016 by sloegin57

[Wez]

Like me you obviously been studying the Meteor for sometime - frustrating isn't it !!

Dennis

VERY!!!

Thanks for that snippet Dennis, I'll look forward to your other Meteor posts in the other threads.

Wez

[Wez]

Who say's that they didn't Wez ?

Like me you obviously been studying the Meteor for sometime - frustrating isn't it !!

Quote from Bryan Philpotts book "Meteor" ref the PR.10 :-

"Some aircraft appeared with small diameter intakes, but these were later modified as was the part metal canopy, to bring the aircraft into line with the F8 and FR9. Once again a Martin Baker 2E type ejection seat was fitted"

I have a feeling that it was more to do with the MCrit speed of the aircraft, pegged at .82 ( thanks to the ongoing aileron problem) and which aircraft with both types of intake could reach, was the governor that determined the fitment of "big breathers". Some Mods on the Meteor appear to have been less popular than others. A Classic that I came across some years ago in correspondence with an ex CFE pilot was that of the windscreen wiper (Mod.1862). It appears that this was tacitly ignored at the request of the aircrew for the simple reason that if the wiper was in use on the final approach and the flaps were selected down, the wiper promptly stopped working and lay flat against the screen right in the middle and thus blocking or partially blocking the pilots view ahead at a critical time. A few T.7's were fitted with it but I have yet to find a photo nor can I remember seeing a single seater fitted with one.

Ballast and ailerons I'll deal with on the relevant threads ( frightening !)

Dennis

Reading this again, could it have been done to improve the altitude performance of the PR.10?

My original answer was based on F.8's, I still haven't seen any RAF F.8s that had been retro-fitted (I'm still not saying it wasn't done, just haven't seen any evidence of it).

Regarding the Airfix kit, it's obvious we'll get an FR.9, I just wonder if a PR.10 is on the cards, is there sufficient interest (apart from us odballs and wierdos), for the drone variants, they're certainly colourful. I'm also wondering why we've had to wait so long for this kit.

[AnonymousAA72]

I take that back...I have found dome 'evidence' of retro fitted wide breathers. From Wings of Fame Vol15...."a subtle change was the provision of new wider diameter intake...colloquially known as 'deep breathers'..and were fitted to most WK and WL serialled F8's on the production line....these features were sometimes also incorporated by retrofit, the new intakes also appeared on WE876, WF654 and WH286 for example .."

The article doesn't say where and when these retrofits did occur, nor how. As I said earlier at least one F8 WA982 had its main planes, and one would assume the engines and nacelles(!) from WK660......that may or not be a factor in some cases?

[Wez]

I take that back...I have found dome 'evidence' of retro fitted wide breathers. From Wings of Fame Vol15...."a subtle change was the provision of new wider diameter intake...colloquially known as 'deep breathers'..and were fitted to most WK and WL serialled F8's on the production line....these features were sometimes also incorporated by retrofit, the new intakes also appeared on WE876, WF654 and WH286 for example .."

The article doesn't say where and when these retrofits did occur, nor how. As I said earlier at least one F8 WA982 had its main planes, and one would assume the engines and nacelles(!) from WK660......that may or not be a factor in some cases?

WF654 was on 64 Sqn then later with Binbrook TTF, there's a picture of it here with deep breathers http://www.aviationphotocompany.com/p825415273/h6729A176#h6729a176

WE876 was with Church Fenton's Station Flt and later with Changi TFF

WH286 was with 229 OCU as a target tug https://www.flickr.com/photos/126268375@N08/14720244273

Maybe being a Target Tug was the driver for the having the deep breathers, would certainly have been useful to have the extra thrust when towing the banners/drogues

Interestingly this site has pictures of U.16's with either intake, and WH291 on the strength of 85 Sqn as a Target Facilities aircraft and that too has deep breathers http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=9&p=23334

Sorry for hijacking the thread a bit on this but it kind of answers the original question, did the drones have large or small intakes, the answer appears to be either for U.16's, not sure about U.21/21A's.

[sloegin57]

Reading this again, could it have been done to improve the altitude performance of the PR.10?

The PR.10 had the highest service ceiling of any Meteor and could reach 47,000 feet. It could also stay airborne for longer, 3.5 hrs, than the stripped Venoms that were temporally used for that purpose although the latter could reach an altitude of 55,000 feet.

Dennis

[71chally]

Sorry if this is a bit late, but back to the original question, there is nothing fitted behind the pilots seat of U.16 WK800, it's just an empty void, though some of the vertical gun feed parts are still there.

I really hope that a good U.21/16 conversion set and decals get released, maybe an upscaled Alleycat set?!