sloegin57

As shown here:- Dennis W Robinson

Ref your problem with the Mk.30 nose. It appears to me looking at your write up and photographs on site that you have a bad product. I am attaching measurements that I have taken today of the extension and nose that I have in the stash and which were purchased just after the conversion came out in the mid-late 90’s. No way could I get any way near the measurement of 51mm that you achieved. You will also have problems, I believe, with the engine nacelles and front faces. Dennis W Robinson

This was 55119 at Wright-Patt in October 1974 if that's any help. At the time we were told that she was in the original scheme. Dennis W Robinson

I agree with Trojan Thunder and Giorgio N. In the book "Lincoln at War" by Garbett and Goulding only one aircraft is mentioned as having a highly polished NM finish, that being A73-2 named "Nyhuan" and that had fitted a Lancastrian type tail unit. The Lincolns appear to have been devoid of Unit markings apart from the spinners which (according to the same book) were:- 2Sqdn=Yellow; 6Sqdn=Red; 10Sqdn=Pale Blue; 1Sqdn=dark Blue and 11Sqdn-Black. In the Chapter on "Operation Firedog" the same book mentions that the aircraft were beautifully maintained, "particularly their pale green interiors". I suppose somebody better ask:- You planning on building one PHaTNess or just idle curiosity (which normally leads to a build anyway, in my case) ? Dennis W Robinson

Perfectly true Stephen but for some reason, Mod 228 has, of late, been associated with the l/e extension and I was following current practice. I'll amend the line Thanks Dennis W Robinson

This is a Hunter F4 on upgrade many moons ago. Note the primered extension also the slightly extended new tip (which did not increase the span !!) also in primer:_ Dennis W Robinson

Bill - Ignore the wing tip - it is from an F.Mk.1 drawing and the tip panel was widened slightly to accommodate the leading edge extension. Hang on I've a piccie which will explain Dennis W Robinson EDIT:- Reference to Mod 228 in this context has been deleted. DR

No problem Bill and all. The photo was taken by my nephew Phil Boyden, who had a day job of flying around for the company taking happy-snaps of Hunters, Hawks and Harriers. It was taken upside down in a T7 with 2 or 3 Hasselbalds dangling from his neck. The intakes were not recessed. The intake lips and intake were painted white and were probably burnt out by my ham-fisted use of Photoshop. But primarily - take a look at the ailerons and their shape. I am attaching a copy of part of a Hawker Drawing with the aileron blacked in to show the correct shape.:- Note the slight curve of the aileron shroud at the wing tip and the fact that the aileron does taper very very slightly out towards the tip. I am surprised that Revel did not incorporate this as they had access to a set of dimensioned engineering Hawker drawings when doing the 32nd FGA9 which I provided through a third party. I am currently correcting my 32nd kit, one of three I am building. Regards Dennis W Robinson

:ditto: Just what the lads up there said David, plus a bucket load of superlatives not thought of yet. Lovely work. Dennis W Robinson

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...em=300471828159 <http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300471828159>

Quote:- A.P. 4347F Hunter F.Mk.6, Volume 1, Part 1 General Information; sub-para "Wings" last paragraph:- "The leading edge extension is a fixed structural section consisting of heavy gauge skins attached to the outboard portion of the leading edge of the wing structure between ribs H - J and R. The chord line of this extension is angled downwards in relation to the wing chord-line, thereby minimising in-flight 'pitch-up'. Which is a Technical Writer's long winded way of saying, "The leading edge extension droops". And finally, Confirmatory confirmation, confirming the confirmations that confirm the conformation of the structural arrangement of the components previously discussed:- Dennis W Robinson

Hi Square-peg, According to the late JDR Rawlings in his book "Fighter Squadrons of the RAF, 263 Sqdn disbanded at Hildersheim on the 28th August 1945 and reformed at Acklington in September 1945 (no date given). and moved to Church Fenton also in September '45, so their stay at Acklington appears to have been less than a month. I'm afraid that I can find no reference to 263 Sqdn going to Finningly but 616 Sqdn did when it reformed in May 1946 becoming operational in July the same year. Now, according to Mike Cooper, in his book "Meteor Age" (a brief history of 616 Sqdn in the early Meteor days), 616 Sqdn was renumbered 263 Sqdn at Lubeck on the 31st August 1945 (JDDR states the 29th August) and the following day (1st Sept) was posted to the U.K., arriving at Manston the same day and moving on to Acklington four days later with their F.3's. I would imagine that the brief 4 day stopover at Manston would be to enable the rest of the Unit to catch up or for the majority to travel direct to Acklington prior to the whole Unit becoming fully established there. From a modelling point of view, Mike Cooper also states that at Acklington, "Also our aircraft were fitted with fixed 100 gallon ventral long range tanks which increased the safe airborne time from the average 40 minutes to one hour". Both Authors indicate that 263 Sqdn stayed less than a month at Acklington but I would imagine that that short stay would be time enough for the Unit codes to be changed from 'YQ' to 'HE' (inherited from 605 Sqdn in 1939). One interesting snippet of information from Mike Cooper is that whilst at Acklington, "Flt/Lt Jock Rogers and Flt/Sgt Epps were posted to Khartoum, with one Meteor and a team of ground crews, to carry out tropical and desert trials". Both Edward Shacklady and Steve Bond quote this aircraft as being EE336, although Shacklady gets the date confused by stating 1954 (by which time I think, most F3's were long gone) and Bond states that the aircraft was "Loan to Dominion for tropical trials at Khortoum".. Neither author give the Unit. Dambuster has given you a ref for a pic (my copy of that "Classic" book has not yet arrived yet and I am getting somewhat concerned !!) Best o' Luck ! Dennis W Robinson

I've always understood that the intakes were widened (not shortened) by only about 4 or 5 inches which gave extra thrust due to the larger mass air flow available to the engine and that both types of air intake noses were the same length. I'll have to do some digging but if memory serves, I was told that way back - trouble is I cannot remember where. Dennis W Robinson

No. Like you Bill, I had always assumed that the thirty inch extension only applied to the F8 and was introduced due to the success firstly with the T7 and then with the work done with RA382. There are various possibly misleading and again conflicting statements in various publications I have been going through for the last couple of days, but I cannot as yet figure out why Shacklady made such a positive statement regarding the stretching of the F4's or where he got his information from back in 1961/2. That particular paragraph in his book has me completely puzzled and I am still working on it but if you look at the photo of RA382 in Wings of Fame Vol.14 (thanks for the lead), you can see that it would have stuck out like a sore thumb in any flight line and would therefore have been bound to attract cameras (legal or not) to it. No matter which way I read that paragraph, whether I apply a bit of latterly thinking to it ("F-4's were produced with the 30 inch extension but with a different tail and were known as F8's" does not work, because of the phrase in the paragraph, "adopted as standard on all subsequent production F4's"), apply basic quantum theory to it, or even try and stretch the meaning of the word "subsequent", it all seems to boil down to the possibility that Shacklady made a c**k up in it which has quietly rumbled on down the years. As Philpott writes in his "Introduction", sub-para "Acknowledgements":- "In 1962 Edward Shacklady wrote the only full-length book to date on the aircraft and this was published by Macdonalds. Twenty-three years later it still serves as a useful starting point." It might have helped ( in hindsight ) if both Philpott and Stevie Bond had set the record straight in their books but the latter does not appear to mention the stretch whereas the former writes (about the 30 inch extension):- "This proved successful and the longer fuselage was subsequently introduced into late production F4's" which can be interpreted as..........I'll let you all decide that !. I think that I can safely stick my neck out and say that no Meteor F.Mk.4 aircraft with the 30 inch extension entered front line service except those that had been ordered as F.Mk.4 aircraft but which were subsequently built as F.Mk.8 aircraft with the 30 inch extension and fitted with the slightly modified E1/44 tail Unit. Dave Fleming and JohnT. I've found the bit I wrote about F3 airbrakes. It was about 11 years ago whilst I was doing my OU degree course. It's on a floppy - not yer 3 incher but an actual 5 inch floppy floppy in a cardboard envelope. I'll tidy it up, bring it up to date and stick it up as a separate thread to be shot at. John Adams !. You crafty old sod. I think I know where you are coming from and who will be doing it. Bin rather quiet in the south of late. If it is what I think it is - put me down for two - top of the list. And I'll keep shtoom ! Dennis W Robinson

The attached may bring it all together. In Edward Shacklady's book on the Meteor published in 1962 in the Chapter "Interceptors and Trainers", sub-chapter "The Meteor F.4, is the following:- Later, under "Special Purpose Meteor F.4s":- The book "Meteor" by Bryan Philpott say virtually the same, but with a bit of additional information, although in my view the source for that, as well as Steve Bonds book, may well be the Shacklady volume. As the Meteor appears to be well "in vogue" at present at least on this web site, I am tempted to put up my mini-Treatise on Meteor Mk.3 airbrakes, or rather the lack of, as a separate thread. Dennis W. Robinson.

I mean no disrespect to David, I've known him for years - but I agree with Seahawk. Dennis W Robinson

Are you sure Sanguin ? :- Scanned from "Camouflage and Markings No.1", Page 75. Compare the "Grey Tone" of the centre-spot on the roundel with the "Grey Tone" of the codes RAA-J:- Scanned from the Shacklady book on the Meteor Page 83. This time compare the "Grey Tone" of the fin code with the fuselage roundel "Grey Tones":- Scanned from my own collection. Seems to confirm that on later camouflaged Meteors, the fin code was one colour surrounded by a lighter one. Shot at Istres 1956. I'll be on the fence, third post down till about mid-night, drilling holes in a Canberra Dennis W Robinson

Thats easy for a Cotswold lad raised in the Zevern vally and edicated in the 'Vorest o' Dean:- Ainster and Frookie, baint it auld Butt. Zo, apart from the Mad Nurse then, where be 'muchty ? and minch ?

The Modeldecal Sheet referred to by Bill Clark was Number 25. Not sure if it is still available from Hannants. Relevant details attached:- I have also found this photograph of a 500 Squadron Anson in a photo book on the type published in 2000 by The Tempus Publishing Company, The Mill, Brimscombe Port, Stroud, Glos. and compiled by Harry Holmes. ISBN No. 0 7524 1738 X. Going by the date that the photo was allegedly taken I would say that the codes are the so-called "Munich Crisis" codes. Now I shouldn't pre-empt individuals initial impressions but it appears to me that the aircraft has a single colour top and side camo coat with aluminium(?) undersurfaces. Comments please as my knowledge of GR Squadron colours pre-war just about add up to the last two digits of the Squadron number plate. Regards Dennis W. Robinson

Interesting project Sanguin, similar to a paperwork research excercise I did some years ago for Number 501 (County of Gloucester) Squadron but which progressed no further than that. As Damnbuster stated, after 1955, the Meteors were named after areas and towns in Kent but that was not the first time for the Unit's aircraft. Philip Moyes in his "Bomber Squadrons of the RAF" provides photographs that 500's Vickers Virginia IX's were so christened:- 500/A (serial not known) being "Isle of Thanet"; 500/K "Richborough Castle" which also had what appears to be an early version of the Squadron badge on the nose. He also lists J7566/B as being named "City of Canturbury". Whether or not the subsequent Hinds and Ansons (500 became a G.R. Unit in 11/38) were named I do not know. I do not think that I can help you with the early post war equipment operated by the Unit but I can, perhaps establish for you the date that 500 Squadron's Meteor F.8's were camouflaged. The attached captioned photographs and scans from my files will hopefully help. The following notes were scanned from the revised and updated "Fighter Squadrons of the RAF and their aircraft" by the late John Rawlings:- Finally. It would appear that the well known Unit fin markings were not repeated after the demise of WF714 as in September 1956, WH370 was displayed at West Malling with the Squadron badge, "City of Canterbury" and a Squadron Leaders penant on the port side under the windscreen. Standard Unit markings but nothing on the fin. Regards Dennis W Robinson

:worthy: THE best find this year. Dennis

OK Gents, all I have managed to find so far is a one page Article by Bert Kinzey in Fine Scale Modeller for December 1989 (some thirteen years after the 527th was activated at Alconbury:- I know that I have an article "somewhere" on all four schemes together with photographs of the aircraft being unloaded from a C-5A. It has annoyed me that I cannot find it - which means that I will keep searching until I do. When the "Aggressors" came to RAF Leuchars to "play" with Tremblers and 43 Squadron in the late 70's, I took a few photo's of them. I'll dig them out and upload (at least I know where they are - in the computer). I'll be back Dennis

Oh yes, I most certainly will gents. Once I find the article/s, I'll post the relevant bits here and pdf it/them for onward transmission (I have an inkling that three magazines are involved - Scale Models, Airfix Mag and FSM). It may take a while so just talk amongst yourselves ! Dennis

Likewise Julian. In the deepest depths of somewhere in this house in a magazine whose title I cannot recall, there is an article on the 527th written just after they were formed up. I'll try and dig it out and see what the under surface colour for 56 was quoted as then. Dennis

I don't (often) model in seventy-tooth but am building up a file to cross-kit a few Aeroclub vacforms into a PR10 in 48th. Attached drawing and photo were scanned from the Shacklady book on the Meteor. I don't think that I am breaking any copyright rules as the book was published in 1962, but I'll let the Administrators of this forum decide that. Hope these help but bear in mind that the aircraft illustrated, VZ620, was built under separate contract and used by Glosters only so may vary in detail. The drawings in the book were carried out by Peter Endsleigh Castle who, if memory serves, was an extremely proficient Technical Artist in those days. Hope these help DR